Adv. Asif: Okay.
The witness, Mr. Shabbat Laurent: Great. That's what everything was stored. Why? When we were still leaving the buildings, it was in '16, at the end of '16 We left the buildings, right? We left. We stored everything at my parents' house in the moshav who have the warehouses in the moshav. Store everything there. Unfortunately, you know what seats are and you know how these warehouses can usually react and what's called, you know, the cabinets are gone, the papers are gone, the servers are gone. Everything went pretty well. Not only that, other things but yes."[My emphases L.B.]
From his testimony, and especially his reference to Global, and to him himself, in the plural "we went out", "stored" - it appears that even at the time of the company's closure, he identified himself with Shabbat with Global.
In addition, contrary to Shabbat's testimony that he stopped managing Global in 2013, Shabbat testified that he was able to recover the plaintiff's CRM file (see paragraph 23 of his affidavit) - that is, he admitted that even at the time of the lawsuit, he had access to the information held by Global. As for the "data base" of the customers, Shabbat testified on page 149, lines 23-26 as follows:
"The witness, Mr. Shabbat Laurent: No, but I'll explain. Thedata base of, thedata base of option fm It belonged to a third party. If it belongs to a third party, how will I have access? After all, the fact that it came to Banque de Binary I had access to all the customers, their information. Everything that was connected and that was in the first case you brought."
Kerry testified that the person who owned the customers' "database" was not him or Global, but another company. However, contrary to this testimony - in which he tried to distance Global from OFM and claim that it was another company that was not connected to Global - there is no dispute that the defendants attached as part of their affidavits the CRM file documenting all of the plaintiff's transactions, and Shabbat himself testified in paragraph 23 of his affidavit that he was able to recover the plaintiff's CRM - i.e., he admitted to the existence of access to information related to the plaintiff's trade. For the avoidance of doubt, I will add that in his testimony Shabbat confirmed that the information contained in the CRM constitutes the customer's database - i.e., he actually confirmed - contrary to his testimony according to which access to the database is given to another company, that he has access to the plaintiff's database. Thus, on page 190, lines 8-12, Shabbat explained the information in the CRM and in fact clarified that it was a "database" of the customer: