Civil Case (N) 4843-03-20 Aviram Becker v. El Caspi Case – Supreme Court Israel Airlines Ltd. - part 38

This is not an attempt to save costs and then demand "payment" - such as accommodation with a friend (although it can be said that given that this is a non-tortious law, the passenger is not obligated to reduce the damage, and this is not the business of the airline, which is obligated to provide assistance services under an increased liability regime in any case, and therefore if it did not provide it, it does not exempt it from its duty in practice, and thus it "profits" at the expense of the passenger who found for himself an arrangement that it should have provided In advance and in real time, therefore, theoretically she should have given him a sum of money in order for him to get along, and from then on this is his business).  In the margins, I will note that even in the case of property damage, even though the material is damaged, where a certain person repaired a product himself with the purchase of spare parts and brought an opinion to repair the product that is under the responsibility of the importer, it is clear that he will not be given the amount according to the opinion of the place where he repaired himself, nor from a tax appeal since the tax appellant constitutes compensation for potential damage where he decides to repair and will have to pay (when he did not repair and presented an opinion and is not obligated to repair, According to the opinion, payment must be made even if he goes and repairs later in a place that does not provide receipts and without VAT, or does not repair at all) - but the prevailing approach is that this does not exempt the wrongdoer from any payment (and not necessarily the payment of spare parts, but also for the trouble of self-correction that he saved the wrongdoer, as opposed to dismissing him).  Thus, for example, a place where the passenger is no longer at the airport, in relation to certain assistance services such as food and beverages or communication services, and this is a place where the same hotel did not provide meals without her knowledge, or that no hotel was found that provides meals after she tried to locate a hotel that provides meals first, and this under reasonable efforts, even taking into account the number of people she has to take care of (when the hotels she offered and are listed do provide meals and therefore there was no need to present reasonable efforts after which a hotel was found that did not provide meals) or a place where the traveler agrees to this, even if it is not the ultimate option for him, but he has taken his steps and preferred to price his time while waiting for the hotel to be located.