An EV Charging Point in an Israeli Condominium
The question sounds technical but it is a property question: where the parking space stands legally, and what the installation actually touches. Those two answers settle whether consent is needed, whose consent, and what happens when it is refused. This guide sets out the order of checks, what the electricity regulations require, and where to go when consent is withheld.
Whose parking space it is
The number of electric cars is soaring, and whoever has bought one needs a way to charge it where it parks. In a condominium that need often runs into opposition: the car owner wants a connection, and the neighbours claim improper use of the common property, a safety hazard or harm to the building’s appearance. How is this settled lawfully? Start with the first question: whose parking space is it?
Before any electrical question there is a property question, and everything else follows from it. A condominium is made up of separately registered apartments and of common property, and a parking space can belong to either world:
- A space attached to the apartment. It is registered as an attachment in the registry extract and in the by-laws, and it forms part of your right. The starting position here is far stronger.
- A space that is common property, even if in practice you have parked in it for years. Consistent use does not turn it into an attachment.
What to do first, before asking for a quotation: obtain the registry extract and the condominium by-laws, and check what is actually recorded. A great many neighbour disputes on this subject turn out to be arguments about a fact written in a document nobody read.
Use of the common property
A reminder of the framework: the common property is defined in section 52 of the Land Law and includes everything that is not part of an apartment’s registered unit, such as the garden, the yard, the stairwell, the outer walls and the roof. Under sections 55 to 57 of the Law, every apartment carries an undivided share of the common property, in the ratio of its floor area to the floor area of all the apartments. And the building is run by a committee elected at the general meeting under section 65 of the Law, which represents the apartment owners.
The Land Law distinguishes between two kinds of use of the common property, and that distinction is the heart of the dispute:
- Reasonable use of the common property that does not prevent the other apartment owners from making similar use of it. Such use is open to every apartment owner.
- An act that departs from the ordinary management or use of the common property. An act of that kind requires consent, and at the highest threshold the consent of all the apartment owners.
So the whole argument narrows to one question: is installing a charging point reasonable use, or a departure from ordinary use. Trial instances have already recognised a case in which charging an electric vehicle counted as reasonable use, but that turns on the circumstances of the particular building and is not a blanket rule.
What has the Supervisor actually held? The case law of the Supervisor of Land Registration has recognised the installation of a charging point in a parking space as reasonable use of the common property (in free translation from the Hebrew):
“When it is properly installed, connected to the apartment’s own electricity, suited to the conditions of the time and today’s changing reality, and does not prevent another apartment owner from making similar use.”
6/384/2021 Levi Yehiam v. Committee of Rom HaIr Phase D, Kfar Saba, para. 36
In that case it was held that the point may be installed even without the consent of the general meeting, subject to conditions: advance written notice to the other residents of the installation date, an insurance policy covering third-party damage, installation in accordance with the Electricity Regulations (Installation of a Charging System for an Electric Vehicle) 5780-2020, the installer bearing all direct and indirect costs, execution by a qualified and insured contractor, compliance with the Planning and Building Law, and an undertaking to remove the point and restore the common property at the installer’s expense if the use ceases or the apartment is sold. The Supervisor stressed that the aim is “preserving the safety and appearance of the building and preventing harm to the rights of the other apartment owners” (ibid., para. 49).
⛔ And here is a note to read before relying on anything found online. The consent threshold is precisely the point on which the legislation has been moving in recent years, and more than one arrangement has been proposed. The threshold in force at the time of your own application therefore has to be checked specifically, not taken from an article written two years ago. What does not change is the order of checks on this page.
What the installation touches
Not every installation is the same, and this is what sets the height of the threshold you will have to clear:
- A connection to your own private meter, within a space attached to your apartment. This is the simplest installation in property terms. It barely touches the common property, apart from running a cable.
- Running a cable through the common property to reach the space. Here the common property is already involved, and the question becomes the extent of the interference and how the position is restored.
- Touching the building infrastructure: the main electrical panel, a transformer room, or increasing the size of the building connection. This is the level at which a shared cost arises, and therefore the highest consent threshold.
The practical conclusion: a design that minimises contact with the common property also minimises opposition. Before filing a request it is worth asking the installer for a route that keeps the run through the common property as short as possible, and presenting it to the neighbours as part of the approach.
Where the legislation is heading. Statutory regulation is advancing in steps worth knowing. In December 2020 a memorandum of a Land Law amendment (Installation of an Electric Vehicle Charging Point), 5781-2020, was circulated for public comment, seeking to anchor in the Land Law provisions for installing charging infrastructure in the common property by an apartment owner, along the lines of the existing arrangements for a lift and for a communications network. A bill followed, the Land Law (Amendment No. 35) Bill 5782-2022, concerning the installation of an electric vehicle charging point in a condominium. According to the explanatory notes, the purpose is “a balance between the property right of the apartment owners in the common property and the need of an individual apartment owner to use the common property to run suitable infrastructure for installing an electric vehicle charging point”.
The bill distinguishes three connection routes: a domestic connection, directly from the car owner’s own apartment supply; a dedicated connection, an additional supply serving the charging point and installed under the Electricity Authority’s rules; and a public connection, from the electricity serving the common property, such as lifts and lighting. For a domestic or dedicated connection the bill proposes allowing installation without the residents’ consent, subject to conditions such as notice to the committee and compliance with electricity law; for a public connection it proposes requiring the consent of a majority of the apartment owners, since it draws directly on the common property’s supply.
An important clarification: these are a memorandum and a bill, not binding law. As at the date this page was updated the legislative process has not been completed, so the law in force, including the required consent threshold, must be checked at the time you act.
The electricity regulations
Alongside the property question there is a layer that is not open to negotiation with the neighbours. The Electricity Regulations (Installation of an Electric Vehicle Charging System), 5780-2020 set out how a charging system may be installed: the manner of installation, the protections required and the technical conditions.
Two conclusions follow:
- The installation is carried out by an electrician holding the appropriate licence, and not by whoever sells the unit.
- Compliance with the regulations is also the strongest legal argument with the neighbours. A safety objection is the most common argument raised against an installation, and confirmation of a compliant installation empties it of content.
What is worth keeping on file from day one: the electrician certificate, the specification of the unit, and a record of the state of the site before and after the installation. Those three documents decide a later argument, whether with the house representation or before the supervisor.
Dealing with the neighbours
The order that reduces opposition, from experience:
- Approach the house representation in writing, not orally and not in a messaging group. A written approach creates a date and a record.
- Set out exactly what is planned: where the unit goes, the cable route, which meter it connects to, and who bears the cost.
- Say in advance what you undertake: installation under the regulations, restoring the position on completion, and responsibility for damage caused by the installation.
- Allow a reasonable time for a reply, and record what came back and what did not.
- Offer the neighbours a solution where it is possible, for example infrastructure that would let others connect later. That turns the discussion from a private request into an improvement to the building.
What does not work: installing first and giving notice afterwards. An installation carried out without a process puts you on the defensive even where the right is on your side, and it turns an argument about reasonableness into an argument about a fait accompli.
When consent is refused
A dispute between apartment owners in a condominium is not heard in an ordinary civil court. The decision lies with the supervisor of land registration, who sits as a judicial instance in condominium matters. It is a focused proceeding, and usually far quicker than a civil action.
What is weighed there, in practice:
- The status of the parking space under the registry extract and the by-laws.
- Whether the installation complies with the electricity regulations.
- The extent of the interference with the common property, and whether it is reversible.
- Whether the objection is substantive or a bare refusal.
And when did the Supervisor order a point removed? In Committee of the Condominium at 9 Berlin St, Tel Aviv v. Engel it was held that the installer’s use prevented other residents from making similar use and even contravened the Electricity Law, so she was ordered to dismantle the point at her own expense. Yet even there the connection itself was not barred:
“The claim is allowed in the sense that the defendant must dismantle the charging point she installed, at her own expense (once the building is connected to the new system according to the arrangement presented by the committee). If a connection serving 60 electric cars is not carried out, the claimants or any of them must allow the defendant to connect to the common electricity board through an electricity meter and in accordance with the Electricity Law.”
CC 783/20 Committee of the Condominium, 9 Berlin St, Tel Aviv v. Engel, para. 69
The conclusion from the two cases: a charging point is possible where it does not prevent other residents from installing or using a similar one and complies with electricity and planning law, all at the installer’s expense.
And in the other direction: if you are the objecting neighbour, an objection grounded in a tangible and defined harm, for example a load on the building infrastructure or a blocked passage, is a different thing entirely from a general objection. A refusal without reasons is not a strong position before the supervisor. More on this at Condominium registration.
Every case is examined on its own facts. For a consultation with a lawyer from the real estate department call 02-5953322, send a WhatsApp message to 050-4411343 or leave your details in the form below, and we will get back to you as soon as possible.
What people ask most often
Is the consent of all the residents needed to install a charging point?
I have parked in that space for ten years. Is it mine?
The neighbours say it is dangerous. Does that carry weight?
I installed it and then the neighbours complained. What now?
Where do I go if consent is refused?
All Real Estate Department pages
Before you install, or before you object
Send us the registry extract and the condominium by-laws, and a short description of what is planned: where the unit goes, which meter it connects to, and what it touches. Those settle whether consent is needed at all and who has to give it.