Among the many documents accompanying a construction project, the site work diary is one of the most neglected — and, quite often, the party most harmed by that neglect is the very party who neglected it. A review of the case law shows that the courts show no leniency towards this default.

The Normative Basis: from Statutory Duty to Professional Standard

In the past, the duty to keep a work diary was regulated by regulation 6(3) of the Planning and Building Regulations (Supreme Supervision of Construction), 5752-1992. When those regulations were repealed at the end of 2016, the question arose whether the legal basis for the duty had fallen away. The case law answered in the negative — the repeal of the regulation did not abolish the professional expectation.

CC (Herzliya Mag.) 21849-07-17 Oni Aref v. Elazra Yozma VeHashkaot Ltd. (2019)

The Evidentiary Consequence: an Unkept Diary Is a Double-Edged Sword

In the absence of documentation, it was held that "there is no evidence that the construction works were carried out with the due diligence expected of a reasonable contractor", and that this default "is capable of attesting to the defendants' negligence". The "missing evidence" rule was also applied: the failure to produce the diaries gave rise to a presumption that, had they been produced, they would have operated against the party who withheld them.

CC (Central Dist.) 42023-03-13 Representation of the Condominium at 6 HaBad St. v. Kalash Mordechai Nechasim (2019); CC (TA Mag.) 9168-03-20 Hartuv Levy Ltd. v. Israel Electric Corporation (2025)

Delays and Additional Works: the Diary as an Evidentiary Anchor

The two most common disputes in construction projects are: who is responsible for the delay in the schedule, and who approved the additional works. A properly kept work diary provides a direct answer to both. It has been held that a diary kept unilaterally, without the other party's signature, is admissible in evidence, provided the entries were made contemporaneously.

CC (Nazareth Mag.) 33753-01-18 Yona Peer v. Miron (2023); CC (TA Mag.) 1506-09-18 Mana Contracting Co. v. Mahajna Ali Abu Raad (2024); Insolvency Case (Haifa Dist.) 381/01 Ma'as Pladot Binyan v. Official Receiver (2025)

The work diary is not a bureaucratic form — it is a defence document. A contractor who fails to keep a proper diary may discover in court that its absence has become the strongest evidence against him.

The above is general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. For advice on your specific circumstances, please contact the office.