This data was not requested by the defendants.
- Damage - It must be proven that damage was caused as a result of the breach of contract.
- The plaintiff and its founders invested and courted clients in order for them to enter into affiliation agreements with them. The plaintiff proved that over the years it has increased its customers (in the field of gambling) from 8 customers in 2017 to 68 customers in 2021: in 1/17 the plaintiff had 8 customers that the plaintiff promoted on the comparison site CASINO UK , and in April 2017 the plaintiff established another comparison site: gambling sites in Ireland.
- The plaintiff has succeeded in increasing the scope of its clients. At the end of 2017, it had 19 clients, in 2018 - 26 customers, in 2019 - 33 customers, in 2020 - 49 customers, in 2021 - 68 clients (Eliran affidavit, paragraphs 18-23, 36).
- The plaintiff's business information was accumulated over years of experience and many resources were invested in it (paragraph 78 of Eliran's affidavit).
- The defendant approached the defendant, who worked for a competing company, knowing that the defendant had an employment contract that limited his contact with the plaintiff's customers after he finished his employment with the plaintiff. The defendant offered him to move to the plaintiff through unconventional economic temptations, to deal in the same field with the plaintiff's clients, who were carefully selected on the basis of the information in the defendant's possession, which was learned by the plaintiff in years of investment, in breach of the agreement. The defendant committed the tort of causing breach of contract.
- It is clear that the defendant benefited from the defendant's infringements.
- On July 10, 2022, about a month and a half after the defendant terminated his employment with the plaintiff, the defendant purchased a domain to operate a comparison site in the field of gambling in Ireland - Casino IE, which was managed by the defendant in the plaintiff. The defendant began operating the gambling sites: Casino IE, Casino UK from 7/22 (Appendices 9-10 to Eliran's affidavit).
- The plaintiff presented that she suffered damage in the six months due to the rise of the defendant's gambling sites , in which the plaintiff experienced a decline in income from those customers. According to a breakdown of income from the plaintiff's customers in the months 12/21 - 5/22 and in the months 8/22 - 1/23 in the amount of ILS 2,350,215 (Appendix 15 to Eliran Ozan), it appears that there was a decrease in income (as detailed in detail above):
- The defendant claimed that the data (Appendix 15) were tendentious and did not prove the damage caused to the plaintiff. Yogev Oz claimed in his affidavit (paragraph 67.1 of the affidavit) that regulatory restrictions regarding gambling sites are what caused a decrease in revenues from these customers or that more comparison sites were opened in the field, and that the entire industry experienced a decline in activity from 8/22 to 1/23 compared to the previous period (Yogev Oz's affidavit 67.1-67.2). This claim has not been proven.
- Uzan admitted that his claims could not be proven. However, his testimony supported the plaintiff's version that there was a decrease in income from these customers:
Adv. Les-Gross: So you don't know, you say I guess Raz did the This, as dates.