The other side of the coin is that it is a right in terms of its essence and content It is not a leasewill not be considered a "right in real estate" under the law, since What does not look like a duck, does not walk like a duck, and does not miss like a duck is not a duck, even if it is called a duck...
- In the same way, and for the same reasons, the appellant should not be regarded as having sold the right in the land to the entitled persons, the purchasers of the "Buyer's Price" apartments.
As I have determined, the appellant should be regarded as someone who served as an executing contractor for the state, a projector whose job it is to carry out the flagship project "Buyer's Price" in the name and for the benefit of the State, in accordance with its policy, while the appellant signed the legal agreements following her winning the tender and built the "Buyer's Price" apartments. This is how it acted in the name and on behalf of the state when it The Offense The apartments are for those who are eligible.
As Clarified in detail Above, the appellant did not decide at any stage to whom to sell the "Buyer's Price" apartments that she built, and at what price. This fundamental right, which normally exists in the hands of the owner of a "lease right" from the ILA, was taken from the appellant and is in the hands of the state. Therefore, while the appellant transfers the apartments to those who are eligible, she serves only as the state's extended hand, as it has taken upon itself, in addition to the construction project, the project of transferring the "Buyer's Price" apartments to the eligible buyers.
It will be noted and mentioned, that according to the provisions of the sale contract between the appellant and the entitled buyers of the "Buyer's Price" apartments, Buyers Required These apartments Commit to signing a lease Directly vis-à-vis the stateas the owner of the land, according to its procedures, and there is no dispute about this. Moreover, the lease contract stipulated a stipulation according to which an irrevocable power of attorney would be attached to the sale agreement, allowing the appellant to sign On behalf of the eligible purchaser On a lease contract with the ILA in relation to a "sale" as defined in the sale agreement.
- Moreover, in the framework of the judgment in the High Court of Justice case 7258/17 Zandberg et al. v. Ministry of Construction and Housing et al. (January 21, 2018) A petition was heard by a group eligible from Series B in the "Buyer's Price" program in the settlement of Shoham, in relation to the terms of the lottery and the actual division of those eligible into "series" according to the date of submission of the application for a certificate of eligibility. The Honorable Judge Y. In the preamble to his judgment in the aforementioned petition, Amit (as he was then called) reviewed the essence of the "Buyer's Price" program and stated:
""Buyer's Price" is a large-scale government program, the main purpose of which is to enable those who do not own an apartment to purchase an apartment at a price lower than the market price. As part of the plan, the Israel Land Authority markets land through tenders, and the winner of the tender is the one who has committed to sell apartments to those eligible for the plan at the lowest price per square meter. After a developer or contractor wins, he is obligated to sell a certain percentage of the apartments to those eligible for the "Buyer's Price", and for this purpose a lottery is opened to which those eligible for the program are invited to register. As part of this lottery, the winners of apartments in the same project are determined. If the winners choose to exercise their winnings, they will be given the opportunity to purchase an apartment in the order in which they won the lottery. This means that the state markets apartments through private entities, And the discount on the price of the apartment is derived from a subsidy of the price of the land (and part of the development expenses). These are the basic principles of the "Buyer's Price" program, but the details of the program have changed and are changing over time. The plan is anchored in government decisions, the decisions of the Israel Lands Council and the bylaws, and the main changes are reflected in the latest decisions that are published."