In any event, at no stage did the appellant have a valid and enforceable legal right to lease the land for a period of more than 25 years.
- I have given my opinion to the respondent's argument that even in "regular" ILA tenders, the developer who wins the tender builds on the land and sells apartments (or other assets) in a period of time that is shorter than 25 years, and therefore, according to the respondent, there is no difference between the lease according to the "Buyer's Price" tender and the lease in a regular ILA tender.
I am of the opinion that the respondent is wrong in this argument.
As detailed and explained above, the question that requires examination is the question of the existence of an enforceable legal right, which is clear and certain. In other words, we must examine and determine whether the appellant, following her win in the "Buyer's Price" tender, and after signing the contractual array that she was required to sign and which she was required to fulfill (a lease contract, an appendix to special terms, a construction contract and the control company's documents and terms), a legal right of a lease for a period of more than 25 years, the enforcement of which she can demand in court.
There is no doubt in my opinion that in the case before us – the appellant did not receive such a legal right that can be enforced in court, and in fact – the opposite is true.
On the dates on which all the agreements between the appellant and the state were signed, there was clear certainty that the sales contracts for the apartments would be signed within a short period of time, after the issuance of the building permits, and that the appellant was subject to and obligated to comply with the state's instructions to transfer and sell the "Buyer's Price" apartments to the eligible purchasers, on the dates set by the state, through the control company.
The appellant had no right to decide otherwise, i.e., she had no right to decide that she was not selling the apartments, but, for example, she was keeping them in her possession, or renting them out, and she had no right to decide on the timing of the sale of the apartments.