There is no dispute that the conclusion of an agreement can and will be done by way of conduct. It is the conduct of the parties that determines the essence of the engagement from a legal point of view, and not the subjective interpretation that each party gives to it (see Civil Appeal 290/80 S.G.M. Parking lots in Tax Appeal v. State of Israel, 37 (2) 633, and see also Civil Appeal (Jerusalem) 355/89 Estate of the late Nicolas Hinnawi v. Leumit Brewery Ltd., 46 (2) 70).
The scholar G. Shalev, in her aforementioned book, is of the opinion that not every proposal allows acceptance by way of behavior, and that only in a case where the proposal implies a way of acceptance in behavior, will the question arise as to which behavior will be considered acceptance (ibid., p. 218)."
THE INTERPRETIVE WAY TO CLARIFY THE FULL BENEFITS OF BOTH PARTIES IS BY EXAMINING THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CONCLUSION OF THE CONTRACT (SEE CIVIL APPEAL AUTHORITY 5394/09 MEDITERRANEAN CAR AGENCY IN TAX APPEAL V. KIA MOTORS CORPORATIONS ([PUBLISHED IN NEVO], 27/06/12)).
In contrast to a contract made between the parties in writing, in which the language of the contract plays a central and important place in the interpretation process, when a claim is made before the court about a contract made in a criminal appeal or conduct, the court must trace the intentions of the parties in accordance with the circumstances of the case."
- Although the plaintiff used the term "partnership outline" where he actually sought to be counted as a shareholder in a company owned by the defendant, it is possible to further draw from section 2 of the Partnerships Ordinance [New Version], 5735-1975, which establishes various issues that must be examined, in order to reach a decision as to whether or not there are partnership relationships, and states as follows:
"2. In order to decide whether or not there are partnership relationships, the following rules must be considered:
.....
(8) Except as stated above in this section, the receipt of a share of the profits of the business, or any payment that depends on the profits of the business, or the variable thereof, shall be prima facie evidence that the recipient is a partner in the business, but this evidence may be contradicted in view of all the circumstances of the transaction between the parties."