There is also no dispute as to the existence of a dispute.
Geffen categorically denies any fraud; seeks to enforce the merger transaction on the respondents; to force Polybit to repay the loan; It also petitions for its share of the transaction with Ayalon.
On the other hand, Polybit and the Respondents demand that the merger transaction be cancelled on allegations of fraud and deception, Polybit refuses to return the loan it received and petitions to deduct it from the compensation that Geffen must pay to Respondents 2-4 for its breach of the agreements with them and for the fraudulent acts it committed.
- In the first stage, I will address the arguments of respondents 2-4 opposing the appointment of an arbitrator, And then I will move on to the real question that requires a decision and that is the addition of Polybit to an arbitration proceeding.
In the absence of a dispute regarding the existence of an arbitration clause in the three agreements with respondents2-4, and in the absence of a dispute regarding the existence of a dispute, these respondents support their objection to the appointment of an arbitrator to the extent of its applicability, and claim that "the wording of the arbitration clause deals only with disputes relating to the 'operation of the company' and not with claims regarding the cancellation of the agreements".
However, the language of the arbitration clause is broad and it expressly states that it relates to any dispute between the parties with regard to the operations of the company or the provisions of this agreement..." , that is, not only on the operation of the company, but also on the provisions of each of the agreements.
The courts adopt a broad and sustained interpretation, and not a restrictive interpretation that has no basis in the language of the stipulation or the intention of the parties, and there is no need to expand beyond that.
- The Respondents also deny the validity of the arbitration clause in light of the cancellation notice they sent to Gefenwhen, according to their taste, in the absence of agreements, there is no Arbitration Clause.
This argument should also be rejected. Whether or not the letter of August 24, 2023 constitutes a valid notice of cancellation - a question that will probably be decided on its merits by the panel that will hear the dispute - this does not affect the obligation to litigate arbitration, since the arbitration clause is intended precisely for cases in which the claim of breach of contract or cancellation will be raised.