Fredrika Shavit v. Rishon Lezion Jewish Burial Society

In the district court, Judge J. Zeft rejected Dr. Shavit’s request,
and that rejection is the subject of this appeal.
Legal Background – Gideon [1] and Kestenbaum [6]
3. It seems I was naïve in believing that the courts must follow in
the footsteps of previous rulings. First there was Gideon [1], in which the
Court – in a majority opinion – ruled that everyone has the right to carve
standard Gregorian dates of birth and death on a gravestone (in that case,
on a father’s grave). The judgment of Justice Etzioni – which Justice
Berenson joined – gives us a clear and explicit ruling, in precise and
unambiguous language, and those who study it will understand it
perfectly. Judge Etzioni wrote, for example:
No one in the world disputes the right of people to honor the
memories of their loved ones who have departed from this
world in the way that they see fit, in line with their way of
life and traditions, providing they do not harm the legitimate
sensibilities and interests of others. It is also clear that a
cemetery is a place not only for burying the dead but also
for expressing the love and respect the living continue to
feel for the departed.
Gideon [1] at 23.
He continued:
This is simply an arbitrary negation of the right to use the
standard calendar to record the dates of birth and death of a
person whose life revolved around this calendar!
Id.
What more is there to add? The Court has established its ruling
on the matter, that the prohibition on carving Gregorian birth and death
dates is a “restrictive condition” that is discriminatory under section 14 of
the Standard Contracts Law, 1964.