It was claimed that Ituran acted in violation of the Protection of Privacy Law, 5741-1981, the Computers Law, 5755-1995, and in breach of contractual obligations towards its subscribers. Its actions, which included surveillance, locating and documenting human movements, constitute an illegal invasion of privacy and contradict basic principles of human dignity and liberty. It was claimed that the company was storing "an illegal raw database of Israeli citizens," which could be retrieved at any time. It was emphasized that there is no difference between a private company and a private person in the context of surveillance, and that these actions, if carried out by a police investigator or a private citizen, would be considered a serious criminal offense. The defendant, like any citizen, did not give informed consent to retroactively monitor his vehicle, especially not after the service was disconnected.
According to the defendant's counsel, receiving evidence originating from Ituran, after the user has explicitly disconnected from the service, is liable to send a serious public message that the state is entitled to monitor, verify and penetrate the private space of its citizens, even against their express will. The training of this evidence makes violation of laws and agreements the "norm," and allows private companies to carry out actions that are prohibited from any other party. The defendant himself, who purchased the vehicle without knowledge of an active Ituran system, and believed that it was disconnected, was a victim of this surveillance.
It was argued that "disconnection" from the service, as explained by Ituran's representatives, refers only to the cessation of the receipt of "usable/processed" data, but does not prevent the continued storage of raw data in the company's databases. The supplementary document stated that this was a "human error" or a "very exceptional case", but this explanation should be rejected in the absence of any supporting evidence, especially since the representatives of Ituran themselves contradicted each other in the context at hand.