A Certain Exception to the Strict Approach described above, Held in the matter Peony of the Forest, There it was held that Possible "Qualify" Defect in a bank guarantee, If the following conditions are met:: (1) The mistake is learned from the guarantee itself; (2) It is possible to determine the intention of the bidder-which errs from objective evidence placed before the tenders committee at the opening of the bids; (3) The bidder made a mistake in the end.-32; (4) The mistake and its correction do not give the bidder an advantage that violates the principles of tender law, Foremost among them is the principle of equality.
Over the years, there have been voices in case law calling for a reconsideration of the strict approach to a defect in a bank guarantee, even in cases where all the conditions set forth in the matter are not met Peony of the Forest. Nevertheless, it was suggested that there is room to examine each defect on its merits, and to examine whether its existence violates equality between the bidders (see, for example: Appeal Petition/Administrative Claim 7371/20 Roland in Tax Appeal v.' Golan Regional Council, paragraph 30 of the judge's judgment A' Grosskopf (In the knowledge of Singular) [Nevo] (22.7.2021); Appeal Petition/Administrative Claim 9289/20 Light Tea.To.V.Ann.T.Ai in Tax Appeal v' Detachment of Estates of Municipal Transportation Routes for Mass Transit Ltd."From, paragraphs 10-13 of the judge's judgment A' Grosskopf (In the knowledge of Singular) [Nevo] (20.5.2021); Appeal Petition/Administrative Claim 7230/19 Gili and Yoel Azaria in Tax Appeal v.' Ben Ari Tel Ram Projects Ltd."From, paragraphs 5-6 of the judge's judgment J' Elron (In the knowledge of minority) [Nevo] (26.5.2020); Appeal Petition/Administrative Claim 5375/15 Security Services Avidar in Tax Appeal v.' Netivei Israel - The National Infrastructure Company, paragraphs 5-11 of the judge's judgment J' Associate (In the knowledge of minority) [Nevo] (11.8.2016); See also: Yigal Marzel: "Defect in the guarantee for a bid in a tender and the question of proportionality" Law 203 (2015)).