It should be emphasized. My conclusion regarding the lack of credibility of Mr. Sidon's version is not based on the words of boasting that he made in his conversation with the relocation of the Goren meeting place (Appendix P/5 to the evidence), but rather on the entirety of his conduct prior to the signing of the contract and during it, as well as on his claim regarding the initiation of the meeting with the relocation of the Goren meeting venue at the Roladin restaurant, as well as with regard to the non-attachment of the transcript of the conversation in the first place, including his claim that he did not play it to his friends because "it was completely disrupted", even though he immediately afterwards retracted his statement and said, "In my opinion, it is not disrupted" (his interrogation at p. 1236, paras. 19-21).
Plaintiff 7 - Carmit Shimoni Cohen and her partner Elia Shimoni
Mrs. Carmit Shimoni Cohen claimed in the affidavit that her husband, Mr. Elia Shimoni, was interested together with his friends in purchasing agricultural land in the city of Ashkelon. She and her spouse did not purchase a plot of land on August 10, 2011, the date on which the other members of the class of plaintiffs 3-7 purchased plots of land. Only two weeks later, on 28 August 2011, did the couple purchase a plot of land in the area. Ms. Carmit Shimoni also claimed that she was required to bring the entire amount in cash, and to record in the contract a lower amount than what she actually paid.
Mrs. Shimoni Cohen added, "Although I formally purchased the plot and it was registered in my name, the person who was active in all the stages before the signing of the contract was my husband Elia Shimoni Cohen. He was in contact with the realtor Shlomi Dahari, and I trust everything in his affidavit" (paragraph 5 of the affidavit). At the same time, it was claimed that only in 2016 did the Shimoni couple realize that the administration had the right to return the land to itself.
In her interrogation, Ms. Shimoni Cohen claimed that her husband had told her about the potential for the potential thawing of the land (p. 1319 of Prov. S. 22). She also admitted that they knew that they were purchasing agricultural land, "without promises, without commitments" (ibid., at p. 1320, paras. 17-20), "but we did not know that we would be left without agricultural land either" (ibid., p. 1322, paras. 3-4). In this context, she added that she did not know about the existence of the contract with the manager (ibid., ibid., paras. 14-15). However, this argument was rejected by me, as stated, in light of the clear language of the contract it signed.