Adv. Brotfeld: It may not be that she is not appearing, but you have made an offer to her. Look,
Witness, Mr. Moas: Maybe I made an offer to her, what does that have to do with it? I made offers to 70 other people, so what?.."
(p. 32 of the transcript of May 30, 2024, paras. 9-13, emphases not in the original).
- He later denied the allegations, claiming that he was not a signatory to the proposal and that my father had not worked for him (p. 32 of the minutes of 30 May 2024, paras. 23-39, p. 33, and p. 34, paras. 1-5).
- What is stated in Avi's affidavit, together with the tender offer dated April 12, 2021, in which Avi is identified as a sales manager of Iris Marketing and on the company's official letterhead, constitute a direct indication of active engagement in a competing business during the period of Avi's employment with the plaintiff. His unconvincing version of administrative assistance on the grounds of gratitude is inconsistent with the manner in which it was presented in the document, nor is it consistent with the scope of the order (as stated, in the value of $100,800,000 million). The activity for a competing company in the field of products that the plaintiff supplied at the time, attests to a breach of the employment contract, as well as a breach of my father's fiduciary duty and good faith, as well as the provisions of the employment agreement that justify the award of compensation without proof of damage.
- Notwithstanding the above, we note that the plaintiff did not meet the burden of proving that the transaction was executed , and the company's representative was not even summoned to the hearing in order for his testimony to support the claim regarding the execution of the transaction.
The Pangea Deal
- The email message dated September 14, 2020 (Appendix 41 to Tsafrir's affidavit) sent by a representative of Pangea to Avi and a man named Tal, indicates that Avi was directly involved in the Iris Marketing transaction. The email lists a quantity of 237,370 boxes of gloves, and it is recorded that:
"The payment will be made by Pangea Projects for the benefit of Iris Marketing, after receiving the goods in Israel and after the approval of the goods by a representative on behalf of the customer - the Ministry of Defense."
- A price quote was attached to the email - although the document is truncated, it can be seen that this is an order of 240,000 boxes at a price of $7.8 per unit, i.e., an editorial value of about $1.85-1.87 million.
- Here, too, Avi does not deny that this was an engagement between Iris Marketing, and claims that they never had any contact with the plaintiff. It was also claimed that the involvement was purely with administrative assistance and that to his knowledge the transaction had not materialized (paragraphs 80-81 of my father's affidavit).
- In his affidavit, Yaakov does not deny my father's involvement in this transaction, but claims that it was not carried out and that he does not have a permit to work with the Ministry of Defense, and in any case the transaction is not related to the plaintiff (paragraph 26.13 of Yaakov's affidavit).
- If so, what is stated in the e-mail, which explicitly relates to payment terms and approval by a government authority, indicates substantial involvement of my stepfather, who exceeds purely technical assistance, from which it appears that my father was engaged at the time in promoting transactions in a competing business, while he was employed by the plaintiff. Even if the transaction was not executed, the conduct of the business contacts, without disclosure and coordination, creates a conflict of interest that violates his obligations under the employment agreement, as well as violates my father's duty of good faith and loyalty , which justifies the award of compensation without proof of damage.
- However, even with respect to this transaction, the plaintiff's claim that the transaction was executed was not proven, andYaakov's claim that the transaction was not executed was not contradicted. In addition, the plaintiff did not bother to summon a representative of the company to testify on the matter.
Fees agreement with Tal Sharir
- Attached to Tsafrir's affidavit was a commission agreement dated November 11, 2020 between Iris Marketing and Avi on the one hand, who were defined as a "customer" with a person named Tal Sharir. As part of the fee agreement, the two undertook to pay Tal Sharir a brokerage fee for brokerage services with a third party for the import of gloves (Appendix 30 to Tsafrir's affidavit). Despite the importance of this, Avi does not refer at all to the fee agreement in his affidavit.
- Yaakov claimed in his affidavit that he did not know a person named Tal Sharir, and later added that "in any case, this matter is in no way connected to A.T. and the transactions that Tsafrir claims were 'stolen' from him" (paragraph 26.7 of Yaakov's affidavit). As we shall see below, these claims were refuted by the testimony of my father, who testified unequivocally about the involvement of Iris Marketing in this engagement. The contradiction between Yaakov's version and the aforementioned evidence and testimony undermines his credibility, and establishes a real connection between Iris Marketing and this transaction.
- My father's testimony on the subject speaks for itself. When asked about his involvement in the agreement, he did not provide a substantive answer. However, the content of his testimony indicates that he acted on behalf of "Iris Marketing" and that he was a party to a commission agreement. This is what emerged from his testimony before the court:
"Adv. Brotfeld: I would like to refer you to Appendix 3 to Mr. Zadok's affidavit, this is a commission agreement I see from 11/11/2020, more or less the same date, that I see that between one Tal Sharir and Iris Marketing and also your name appears here, Avi Matzliah and you together are defined as the client. Appendix 30 to Mr. Zadok's affidavit. First of all, explain to me and to the court what is this fee agreement that you are actually a party to with that one Tal Sharir from November 11th?