Alongside the statements of Mr. Zidon and Mr. Shimoni, even after the transfer of the venue of the hearing, Junger claimed in his affidavit, "After a few months, rumors reached my ears that there was a possibility that in the event of a change of designation, the land would return to the Administration, but it seems to me that he told us that he had spoken with Dahari and the aforementioned told him that it was not relevant to our case and even suggested that we try to sell our land to other interested parties" (paragraph 16 of his affidavit). The version of Aotearoa's transfer of the venue of the Junger hearing on the matter raises a difficulty. As stated, Mr. Zidon testified that after his conversation with Mr. Dahari, I did not buy it. They bought it and I went with them" (ibid., 1208 s. 17-23), and that "I was very upset" (ibid., p. 1210, s. 22). In light of this, Mr. Sidon testified that he wanted to cancel the agreement, but the other plaintiffs objected to it (ibid., p. 1213, para. 6). In these circumstances, it is difficult to reconcile the argument of the attorney for the transfer of the venue of the Junger hearing that the plaintiffs were satisfied with Mr. Dahari's vague argument where Mr. Zidon himself believed that his words should not be relied upon. At the very least, since the lawsuit claims that if they had known about clause 15 they would not have signed the contracts, it would have been expected that the plaintiffs would continue to examine the matter against the transfer of the place of hearing from Mu'alem and the transfer of the place of the Goren hearing and the offices of the ILA.
It should be emphasized. Mr. Zidon testified, as stated, that he found it sufficient to clarify the matter with Mr. Dahari, after a careful examination with their counsel, the transfer of the place of the Mualem hearing, which is known as the transfer of the place of the Goren hearing and the offices of the Israel Land Authority. According to him, "I was not the proprietary legal authority in our group" (ibid., at p. 1467, paras. 11-12), and therefore he contacted the two attorneys in the group, and the location of the hearing of Ariel Cohen was moved and the venue of the hearing was moved to Junger, who told him "that they were not familiar with any such practice" (ibid., at p. 1469, para. 18). However, Mr. Zidon's claim that Attorneys Cohen and Junger were the "proprietary legal authority" in the group, and that they told him "that they were not familiar with any such practice," even though they were "not involved in it," is inconsistent with the version of Attorneys Cohen and Junger in their affidavits.