A: I didn't understand the question, But the restrictions do not apply to the units of the price of the free market, it can sell them...
Q: All the unique features we talked about Now and I can go back but you don't want to, all the unique characteristics that I talked about of the intervention in the agreement between the developer and third parties, a limit on the sale price, the minimum specifications, all these things that we talked about, And I won't repeat all of them, there are no mixed projects regarding the apartments on the free market.
A: They don't exist.
Q: So in the very same project, two apartments are sold by the same developer who won the tender, maybe even in the same building, one is subject to all these restrictions and one is not because it is a free market apartment, right?
A: That's right. Which in large part is what motivates him to also give the bid in the tender, to reflect this price that he considered in his bid, that he knows that he has no limit in the free market."
- The argument made by the respondent in his summaries, according to which a distinction should be made between "the purchased property" and "the period of its possible possession by virtue of an agreement and/or in practice" – is not acceptable to me at all, and in fact it contradicts the case law. The nature of the purchased property is determined in accordance with the contractual conditions and restrictions imposed on the purchaser of the rights in the agreement between him and the State, and it is not possible to separate the period supposedly determined in the lease contract from the rest of the provisions of the overall contractual system, which there is no dispute that they supersede the provisions of the lease contract.
Indeed, as clarified above, it appears that the State made use of a standard version of a lease contract that was used in regular ILA tenders, on which it "dressed" the concrete documents for the "Buyer's Price" program. For this reason, it was also determined that the provisions of the Appendix to the Special Conditions, as well as the provisions of the building contract, prevail over the lease contract to the extent that there is a contradiction.
- The argument made by the respondent that there is no provision in the array of agreements that determines the date of sale of the apartments – He is not It is generally based.
The date of the sale of the "Buyer's Price" apartments to the eligible buyers who won the lottery of the Ministry of Construction and Housing stems from a set of conditions in the Special Conditions Appendix, the building contract and the instructions of the control company, according to which it is clear that in order to realize the goals and purposes of the "Buyer's Price" project - the granting of housing at a discounted price to the homeless and those who are improving housing - the State has determined exactly the date on which a sale contract of "Buyer's Price" apartments will be signed between the Appellant and the purchasers. When the appellant has no discretion in this matter – not with regard to the date of signing the sale contract, and as detailed above – not even with regard to the content of the sale contract.