The appellant's director-general, Mr. Friedman, was cross-examined in this matter and clearly and decisively insisted on these facts, see page 81 of the transcript of the transcript, lines 8-23 and page 82, lines 1-5:
"Q: Look, you claim, you said it before, that you don't have, you can't hold the land for more than 25 years,
A: We can't even last 5 years, we have to comply with the rules that were set for us,
Q: You can,
A: which are very short periods of time.
Q: Refer me to some provision in the tender that sets a time period for you to sell the apartment?
A: The instruction is that I must implement the rules that will be determined by that committee, and later the instructions came from the control company.
Q: I ask, can you refer me to an instruction that says you have to sell, not build, sell within a certain period of time?
A: I say the clause that says in the tender that I have to sell in accordance with the rules that will be determined, the rules were determined after that in the same uh...
Q: Show me some rule that says you should sell to eligible people while X years.
A: In Appendix A this is the initial instructions we received from the control company, the control company determined that within a few days from the day the lists of the winners are given to us we must invite them to the conference and within a few days of the conference we need to invite them to choose an apartment and within a few days from the day the apartment is selected we must invite them to sign a contract, all of this is detailed.
Q: From the day the contract was signed! I'm talking again – an instruction that says you have to sell, complete the,
A: Signing this contract is for sale. What is signing a contract with the eligible person – it is a sale!"
- It should be remembered that the entire essence and purpose of the "Buyer's Price" project is to provide apartments at a discounted price as soon as possible for the homeless or for housing improvers, in accordance with the conditions set by the state. Therefore, the state's purpose in the array of agreements signed with the appellant is to cause and bring about the appellant to build the "Buyer's Price" apartments within a defined and precise period of time – within 40 months from the date of winning the tender, and to transfer them to the eligible purchasers who won the lottery within the shortest possible period of time. It was the state that obligated the appellant to transfer the "Buyer's Price" apartments to the eligible purchasers, on the date set by the state. From a legal point of view, the appellant had no control over the date of the transfer of the apartments.
This state of affairs is completely different from the situation in which a developer has won a regular ILA tender for the purchase of lease rights in certain lands.