Moreover. If plaintiffs 3-7 had called their counsel at that time, a place of hearing would have been concealed, in order for the matter to be examined, it is presumed that he would have informed them about clause 15 of the lease contract, to the extent that they did not remember that he had informed them on the date of signing the contracts. In this situation, the plaintiffs had the power to request, as aforesaid, to cancel the contracts, while preventing, and at least minimizing, the alleged damage that is the subject of the lawsuit, which allegedly intensified over the years.
Nor is there any place, in my opinion, for the claims of plaintiffs 3-7 against Mr. Dahari because of the conversation that Mr. Sidon had with him in 2012. This was because Mr. Sidon testified, following his conversation with Mr. Dahari, that "I did not buy it." Therefore, it is clear that the other plaintiffs, who did not speak to Mr. Dahari, could not rely on fragments of statements that Mr. Zidon reflected to them in his conversation with Mr. Dahari, when Mr. Zidon himself did not believe them. In any event, the plaintiffs knew that Mr. Dahari was a realtor and did not have a legal education, and therefore he was unable to answer the meaning of the contracts they signed as well as the manner in which the administrator conducted himself in relation to the lands whose designation would be changed. There is no claim by the plaintiffs that Mr. Dahari referred them to any reference that supports his claim that the Administration will not return the lands to him in the event of a change of designation. In any event, Mr. Dahari also purchased lands from the Goren Hearing Place, and therefore it is clear that he expected that in the event of a change in the designation of the lands, they would not be returned to the Administration.
This is not the only reason why my conclusion lies.
The meeting at Roladin Restaurant
00
0 Days passed, and according to plaintiffs 3-7, during the months of March-April 2013, plaintiff 6, Mr. Benya Sidon, met with Goren at the Roladin restaurant (the transcript of the conversation, which was recorded by Mr. Zidon, was attached as Appendix A/5 to the evidence). During the conversation, Mr. Zidon stated clearly and explicitly, "The lands belong to the Administration" (p. 29 of the transcript of Q. 27-28). In other words. Mr. Zidon testifies that he knew very well that the lands purchased by the plaintiffs were leased from the Administration, in contrast to the plaintiffs' vague denial. Later, Mr. Sidon further noted, "I am not saying that this will be the case, I have read that it is possible that during the compromise the manager seems to come and say thank you very much and they will be returned to you" (ibid., p. 32, paras. 15-17), and that "I tell you, it is worth it for me to take the risk" (ibid., paras. 20-21). So yes. Mr. Zidon notes that he is aware that the administration may take the lands back and that as far as he is concerned, "it is worth it for me to take the risk."