The Witness, Mr. Jorgenson: I told him that many competing companies were talking to me. He knew about it.
77"D. Fruchtmann: Shahar knew that you were negotiating with "Kulamed"?
The Witness, Mr. Jorgenson: Non-Negotiations. That I talk to other companies, that other companies contact me. Knowledge.
77"D. Fruchtmann: Dawn Knew? Because I didn't see it in the transcript.
The Witness, Mr. Jorgenson: Knowledge. I told them that there are friends who have approached me like optival and other companies, Contact me from other companies. Yes.
77"D Les-Gross: But you said, But for"Kulamed" You didn't tell him?
The Witness, Mr. Jorgenson: Anonymous.
77"D. Fruchtmann: So explain to me why you said about optival, You said there are two companies you don't intend to go to,
The Witness, Mr. Jorgenson: I told him there was a number,
77"D. Fruchtmann: And the only company you intend to go to, You didn't tell him.
The Witness, Mr. Jorgenson: I wasn't going to go yet.
(p. 69 of p.)
- As it appears from the transcript of the conversation between the defendant and Shachar Simcha (dated March 29, 2022), the defendant tells Simchach that he has not yet closed with any company. In other words, the defendant concealed that he was negotiating with the defendant (Appendix 4 to the defendant's affidavit).
- Moreover, when the defendant signed an employment agreement with the defendant (during the notice period). The defendants ensured that a clause of legal defense was introduced:
Adv. Fruchtman: And did you agree to add this section?
The witness, Mr. Oz: Yes. We didn't see any reason not to.
Adv. Fruchtman: And what was the content of the legal defense clause you gave them?
The witness, Mr. Oz: I don't remember.
Adv. Fruchtman: Where is this legal defense clause written?
The witness, Mr. Oz: In a contract that doesn't exist.