The contractual system does not establish any stipulation according to which the appellant cannot hold the land/apartments for more than a few years, and even if there is an undertaking to sell the apartments within a few years, this is a contractual limitation for which the sanction for breach is financial and not the cancellation of the contract.
In any case, the dates set out in the building agreement are actually extended, according to the developers' requests, as a matter of routine. The appellant was obliged to sell the apartments within a few years, not because of any provision in the tender or in the contracts signed thereafter, but because of the requirements of the lending bank.
The appellant's argument that she was not granted the status of a "lessee contradicts the language and essence of the agreements dealing with the sale of a right in the land." It must be determined that the appellant purchased a "right in the land", and there is no basis for the appellant's claims regarding restrictions deriving from the "Buyer's Price" program and the agreements signed after winning the tender, which characterize the provision of construction and planning services.
- Before we are required to examine and decide on the arguments of the parties, it is still necessary to preface and relate to the fact that each of the parties made claims against the other for the expansion of the front in the framework of the agreements.
I have found it appropriate to clarify at the outset, at the outset, that there was hardly any factual dispute between the parties – except for the question of the source of the error alleged by the appellant as a ground for amending the assessment. Throughout the course of the proceeding, it was clear that the dispute, for the most part, was legal and stemmed from facts and documents that were not in dispute at all, except for the matter of their interpretation.
Admittedly, the law states that the pleadings are those that delimit the procedural framework and the dispute between the parties in all its aspects, and therefore, new arguments, They are not mentioned in the pleadings, are not allowed in later stages of the legal process. However, this rule is primarily aimed at raising arguments Factuality News, whereas when it comes to new legal claims, the court may permit them, at the summary stage, to the extent that the claims stem from the factual evidence presented to the court, and to the extent that the court believes that this is not an abuse of the proceeding.
- In the case at hand, since the dispute is mainly legal, and since the factual basis related to the central issue is hardly disputed at all, I find it appropriate to determine that the arguments for the expansion of the front, as raised by both parties, are rejected.
Accordingly, the argument for the expansion of the façade raised by the respondent in chapter E.3 is rejected. In its summaries in section 146, in relation to the Appellant's claim that she did not receive the status of a "lessee of the land" and/or that we are dealing with an agreement for the provision of construction and planning services.