To this it should be added that the fact that a consumer does not delve into and read the contract of carriage is his own business. The defendant's representatives were asked where this is written in the regulations or in the contract with the consumer, and when they received a response that this appears in the contract of carriage between the airline and the consumer (and its meaning, see Civil Appeal 7187/12 Adv. Lior Zemach v. El Al (August 17, 2014)), it was argued against the expectation that they must enter into the regulations and the contract of carriage and learn from it that it did not fly on Shabbat and make the connection with the date of the flight and landing that EL AL published and the clause in the law granting an exemption, which EL AL also published. And I will emphasize again: a demand that the defendant register positively and connect the content of the information it gave to the consumer can be service, not a duty that must be claimed to have been violated. There is also a difficulty in saying that there is misleading because they did not write down what exists in the law according to the wording that the plaintiffs are seeking.
In addition, the damage is at the stage of air transportation, and even if it has published a flight schedule that it is known that it will not comply with and will not carry out and the damage is due to a delay in take-off, there is no basis for the artificial distinction between the stage of advertising and marketing flights and the stage of air transportation, when the damage was caused as a result of the delay, which is air transportation and not at the time of publication (class action Vaknin v. El Al above). This, in addition to the fact that it has not been proven that it was the non-disclosure that caused the damage to each and every passenger and that the consumer relied on the misrepresentation or omission - except for a general statement in retrospect that it is not possible that a passenger would have purchased the ticket if he had known that the flight would be canceled due to the Sabbath or holiday due to landing close to Shabbat - then not every passenger anticipates in advance that a delay will occur when he purchases a flight. Similar to a security situation for which a flight or strike will be canceled, where a workers' dispute is visible in the headlines, and even when flights are canceled due to the security situation, a passenger still purchases without the expectation that the event will necessarily materialize and lead to the cancellation of a flight, without derogating from the fact that he can later claim that the airline did not meet the obligations imposed on it under section 6(e)(1) and against its good faith or negligence due to the fact that it sold tickets in such a situation, This is when he exempts himself from insurance for such cases. Moreover, where the legislature explicitly relates to the issue and excludes it, and we are dealing with a specific late law, it is not possible to receive compensation by virtue of another law for that "act" or "omission", since if so, such a matter should be emptied of its content, if for any cancellation or delay that does not entitle him, he will be argued as aforesaid to be anguish since the requested alternative is to award compensation for non-pecuniary damages. When, for the tort of negligence, they did not even quantify the damage, but referred to the ceiling of the amount of punitive compensation as well as statutory compensation, and if the expenses incurred by them for which they are seeking restitution are what quantify the damage, then the defendant offered them even before the claim to be filed with her, and she would be indemnified, but they chose not to file it. The amount of damage in the sum of ILS 10,000 per passenger is unclear, since even a violation of section 2 of the Consumer Protection Law does not grant a remedy of punitive compensation under section 31A of the Consumer Protection Law, and if it is a matter of pecuniary damage, then it must be proven, and if it is a matter of mental anguish, the matter has already been clarified.