"...Mr. Ofri clarified in his interrogation that he was the living spirit behind Poly-Bit and that he was present and knowledgeable in the questions he was asked about Poly-Bit and the cooperation between the parties,... The lacunae that Mr. Ofri chose to respond is inconsistent with his impressive familiarity with the various details of the merger transaction and with his declared control over the management of Poly-Bit" (section 56)
"... However, it is sufficient for me to point out at this stage that Mr. Ofri, the declarant on behalf of Poly-Bit, confirmed in his interrogation that he himself signed the same agreements from which he wishes to learn about the Applicant's lack of cleanliness, and that in the framework of the negotiations that were conducted between the parties until the signing of the documents of the option agreement and the merger agreement, he and Poly-Bit were represented all along by lawyers (paragraph 56 of the decision)
"To all of the above, it should be added that as emerged from Mr. Ofri's investigation, after the filing of the application that is the subject of this decision, the Poly-Bit shares held by Mr. Ofri's children were transferred without consideration to Ofek Financial Management Company, which is owned by Mr. Ofri, making Mr. Ofri the sole shareholder of Poly-Bit in the chain" (section 49);
In the pre-judgment era in LCA 66369-02-25 Tai Investment and Trade Ltd. v. Gideon Fishman et al. (hereinafter - the Thai case), the above information and determinations were sufficient to activate the third circle mechanism in the Expansion Circles rule established in LCA 3925/12 Chen Ronen et al. v. Adv. Yuval Cohen et al. and to order that the veil be lifted for the purpose of incorporating Polybit into the arbitration, since Mr. Ofri is also hiding behind the three agreements made on behalf of respondents 2-4 that he is the one who according to him is the one who signed them, both behind the Polybit company in which he controls the chain, and also behind the Ofek company, to which the shares of Polybit were transferred without consideration, in which he is also the controlling shareholder, since the misuse of the separation between the legal entities is evident and when this is required "...In order to prevent abuse of the principle of separate legal personality, for example, in order to defraud a person or deprive a creditor of the company."