In short: when a bank opens an execution file on a bill — a promissory note signed with the loan agreement, or a cheque — the way to stop it is an objection to execution of the bill. The deadline is thirty days from the day the warning was served, the objection is filed at the execution office with an affidavit, and once filed the Registrar of Execution orders the execution of the bill stayed and transfers the file to the court. The provisions below are quoted from the text of the regulations.
What “execution of a bill” is, and why it differs from a claim
In a bill file the creditor files no statement of claim. He lodges the bill with the execution office and the file opens. The burden is reversed: it is the debtor who must act, and if he does not act in time the proceedings continue as though judgment had been given. That is why the deadline matters here more than in most proceedings.
Many loan and leasing agreements include a promissory note signed at the outset, sometimes with guarantors. That note is what allows a bill file to be opened without first going through a court.
The deadline: thirty days
Regulation 106(a) of the Execution Regulations, 1979 provides that an objection under section 81A(c) of the Execution Law shall be filed within thirty days of the day the warning was served.
The clock runs from service, not from the opening of the file and not from the day you heard about it. If the warning was not duly served on you, that is a point in itself, and any evidence about how it was delivered is worth keeping.
Where it is filed
Under the same regulation, the objection is filed at the office where the execution application was filed, or at the office attached to the court having local jurisdiction over a claim on the bill.
The regulation requires the objection to set out the names and addresses of the objector and the applicant, the execution file number, the grounds of objection, the amount objected to, the name of the objector’s lawyer or a statement that he will appear for himself, the grounds for local jurisdiction, and an address for service.
What is attached
Regulation 106(b) lists what accompanies the objection, filed in one copy:
- An affidavit, in one copy, verifying the facts it contains.
- A copy or photocopy of every document the objector relies on.
- Copies of the objection and its attachments, enough for service on every applicant.
- A copy of the application to execute the bill with its annexes, if any were filed.
- A power of attorney, where the objector is represented.
The affidavit is not a formality. It is the evidence against which the objection is judged, and a fact not pleaded in it is hard to raise later.
What happens to the file the moment an objection is filed
Regulation 108(a): where an objection under regulation 106 has been filed, the Registrar of Execution shall order the execution of the bill against the objector stayed, and shall transfer to the competent court the application for execution, the objection and all its attachments.
Regulation 108(b): once the objection has been transferred to the court, the application to execute the bill shall be treated as a statement of claim under the summary procedure. The proceeding becomes an ordinary claim, with the bank as plaintiff.
Regulation 108(c) provides that the stay has the effect of a stay under section 17 of the Law, and that steps already taken before the stay order was served — including interim relief — stand until the court decides otherwise. An attachment already imposed therefore does not lapse by itself on the filing of an objection.
If the deadline has passed
Regulation 109 distinguishes two situations:
- An application for extension filed within 30 days of service (reg. 109(a)): in writing, with an affidavit, the substance of the grounds of objection and the grounds for local jurisdiction, transferred to the competent court.
- An application filed after 30 days (reg. 109(a1)): the same requirements, and in addition the Registrar of Execution shall give directions as to interest under section 81A3 of the Law, and transfer the application to the court. Within thirty days of filing it, the objector must add the objection itself.
In practice: a late application brings no automatic stay, and it carries a possible price in interest.
The fee
Regulation 107(a): the party applying to execute a bill pays the fee under the First Schedule to the Execution (Fees, Remuneration and Expenses) Regulations, 1968. Regulation 107(b): where an objection has been filed and the court allowed it, the applicant for execution pays the fee under regulation 4 of the Courts (Fees) Regulations, 2007.
Before objecting: check the balance
An objection is judged against a figure. Before drafting it, break the file balance into its components — principal, interest, fees and costs — and check what was approved and what was added. This archive holds decisions on inflated balances and late reporting to the execution office, and on charging legal costs that no court had approved.
What the courts held against Mizrahi Tefahot in execution matters
Execution file 515509-06-24: sale of a vehicle pledged to Mizrahi Tefahot Leasing approved, buyer's details corrected (2026)
On 28.10.2026 the execution registrar approved the sale of the pledged vehicle for NIS 73,500 "in the absence of an objection on behalf of the debtor". The ID number recorded next to the buyer's name was not his, and on …
- Court
- Execution Office, Haifa (Registrar Shirley Gideon)
- Amount
- 73,500 NIS
- Topic
- execution and debt collection
Class Action 56373-06-21 Beck and Tevel: Mizrahi Tefahot will refund fees for duplicate lawyers' warning letters
The court approved a settlement under which the bank will refund 90% of the fee difference it charged for duplicate series of lawyers' warning letters; according to the bank's affidavit, the refund stood at NIS 2,226,900 …
- Court
- Central District Court (Lod)
- Amount
- 2,226,900 NIS
- Topic
- execution and debt collection
Class Action 35618-05-11 Dimri: Mizrahi Tefahot will align inflated debt balances in execution files
The court approved a settlement under which the bank will align inflated debt balances in execution files with the balance in the bank's books and compensate debtors whose files were closed, due to late reporting of …
- Court
- Central District Court (Lod)
- Topic
- execution and debt collection
Class Action 8929-08-11 Hagma: Mizrahi Tefahot will refund legal expenses charged without court approval
The court approved a settlement under which the bank will refund customers against whom collection proceedings were taken an average amount to be set by sampling, for legal expenses not approved by a court and interest …
- Court
- Central District Court (Lod)
- Topic
- execution and debt collection
28 years later: Execution Office registrar rejects Mizrahi Tefahot motion to add NIS 2.6 million in interest
The Execution Office registrar rejected a motion by Mizrahi Tefahot to add about NIS 2.6 million in interest to a file opened in 1989 for NIS 59,000, after the bank claimed an error in the interest rate. It was held that …
- Court
- Tel Aviv Execution Office (registrar)
- Topic
- execution and debt collection
Civil Appeal 27360-10-15 Zandorf: customer's appeal dismissed, NIS 84,733 debt to Mizrahi Tefahot stands
The appeal was dismissed. The District Court upheld a judgment ordering a customer to pay the bank NIS 84,733 plus interest and NIS 35,000 in costs, and held that the customer, who did not dispute the amount of the debt, …
- Court
- Tel Aviv-Jaffa District Court (civil appeal)
- Amount
- 84,733 NIS
- Topic
- execution and debt collection
Civil Appeal 10189/07 Sasson v. Mizrahi Tefahot: Supreme Court grants the customer leave to defend against the whole debt claim
The appeal was allowed. The Supreme Court held that the customer was entitled to leave to defend against every component of the bank's debt claim, set aside a partial judgment ordering him to pay NIS 996,523 for the …
- Court
- Supreme Court of Israel, sitting as a court of civil appeals
- Topic
- execution and debt collection
Mizrahi Tefahot (Tefahot) mortgage enforcement, Kiryat Gat 2009: after 3 months of arrears
According to a Walla report (21 September 2009), the Kiryat Gat Magistrate's Court held that Bank Tefahot acted negligently and in bad faith when it opened mortgage enforcement proceedings after only three months of …
- Court
- Kiryat Gat Magistrate's Court
- Amount
- 33,000 NIS
- Topic
- execution and debt collection
What this page is not
This page summarises the language of the regulations and is not legal advice. Deadlines, the text of the regulations and the case law change, and every file has its own documents. An objection filed late or without an affidavit may be struck out, so if in doubt consult a lawyer or legal aid.