"Aliyah Grant"
- The main argument of three of the plaintiffs, as detailed above, was that all the defendants, and especially Mr. Victor Yona, made verbal promises to them with regard to the grant on her. This argument is inconsistent with the basic principles of the Association and the Control and their bylaws above, and for this reason in and of itself, this claim of the plaintiffs should be rejected.
- However, this is not enough.
In the players' personal agreements, all of the plaintiffs, it was also determined that this agreement was made in accordance with "the provisions of the Association's budget audit regulations. and subject to the rest of the association's bylaws." (Section 2A of the Agreements) and it was determined that if a provision of Clause 8 of the Agreement contradicts or deviates from the Regulations, it will be considered void. It is clear that the players were aware of the regulations by virtue of what was stated in the agreement with them, and as we will detail below, they also mentioned this in their testimony.
The agreement with them also states that they undertake "not to demand or receive from the Group or any entity on its behalf any payment of any kind and kind, whether in money or in money, directly or indirectly, beyond the consideration specified in clause 6 below...(See also section 3 7:8). (My emphasis is S.S.)
- In addition, in clause 4 of the agreement, the group undertook not to pay such sums, either by itself or by anyone on its behalf. It is further stated in clause 9D of the agreement that this agreement "as submitted to the Authority and approved by it will be the only binding agreement between the parties , and any other agreement that is not submitted to the Authority and not approved by the Authority will be null and void, void and void, and will not be acted upon." (My emphasis is S.S.)
Therefore, even the personal agreements signed by the players, which in this section states that they confirm that they have read them and agree to them, clearly indicate that there is no basis for any oral undertaking. For even if they were invalid, they were invalid.