Tel Aviv Court Rules Rooftop Expansion Does Not Require Yard Surrender

The Tel Aviv District Court has ruled that a top-floor apartment owner expanding their home and building a reinforced security room (mamad) is not required to forfeit access to the building's courtyard or compensate ground-floor neighbors with exclusive property rights. The ruling partially sustained an appeal against a decision by the Land Registrar, which had conditioned the rooftop expansion on granting ground-floor residents exclusive use of the shared yard.

The case centers on a two-story residential building with four apartments on Weizmann Street in Bat Yam. The upper-floor owner sought to expand the apartment onto the roof and construct a mamad. Initially, all co-owners signed the building permit application under zoning plans allowing expansion up to 160 square meters. However, two ground-floor siblings later withdrew their consent, claiming the construction blocked access to the backyard, while the rooftop owner argued the neighbors were using the courtyard without permits.

Presiding Judge Limor Bibi determined that the Land Registrar lacked the legal authority to mandate the division of shared property or attach exclusive rights without unanimous agreement among all co-owners. The court emphasized that a 75 percent majority of apartment owners—or 60 percent for mamad construction—suffices to approve structural extensions. Because all four owners initially signed the permit application, the subsequent withdrawal by the ground-floor residents did not invalidate the required statutory majority.

The court further clarified that the remaining roof areas not utilized for construction and the shared courtyard must remain common property accessible to all residents. The rooftop owner is barred from fencing off unused rooftop sections or installing storage sheds, just as ground-floor occupants hold no exclusive rights to the courtyard. The ground-floor residents were ordered to pay 4,000 shekels in legal costs.