Moreover. In the Rekabi case, the Honorable Justice Amit held, "Hence, in contrast to the 'classic' reliance compensation, compensation for the loss of an alternative opportunity is not 'negative compensation' in the usual sense, since it is intended to return to the injured party profits that were denied to him as a result of the misrepresentation. However, it is also not compensation for expectations, since it does not seek to provide the victim with profits that he would have made if the misrepresentation had been genuine. Hence, the compensation for the loss of an alternative opportunity is a kind of hybrid, whose one leg is rooted in the reliance compensation and the other in the subsistence compensation" (paragraph 38 of the judgment; For the opinion that the head of the damage of loss of opportunity is included in the reliance interest, see the position of the Honorable Justice Grosskopf in Civil Appeal 3510/21 Netzer v. Confino (August 25, 2021)). The Honorable Justice Amit further ruled in the Rakabi case that "compensation for 'loss of an alternative opportunity' therefore has a theoretical basis, but there is a gap between theory and practice, and there is difficulty in applying and proving this hypothetical damage" (ibid.).
The court is indeed entitled to award compensation for the loss of an alternative opportunity, while paying the profit that was allegedly withheld from the plaintiff as a result of the defendant's improper conduct. However, awarding such compensation requires great caution in view of the theoretical and practical difficulties, and therefore, as a rule, their ruling will be in exceptional cases and sparingly. This is particularly true in the present case, when the plaintiffs' claim of the loss of an alternative opportunity was generally argued, as a retrospective wisdom, without any evidence being brought that any of them - and certainly all of them together - would have acted in this way in real time. The assumption that the plaintiffs would have purchased private land in another locality is a hypothetical claim, and in any event, no data were presented regarding the increase in the value of the land in Gan Yavne.