Moreover, it was argued that the defendants refrained from interrogating the plaintiff regarding the misrepresentations and the causal connection to the fraud, and in their summaries they refer only to her awareness of the risk and not to the other misrepresentations. Moreover, it was argued that the defendants refer to the fact that the plaintiff did not attach an opinion, but refrain from referring to any fact that constitutes an interest in expertise. It was further argued that in a financial context, the Supreme Court ruled that proof of a continuous conflict of interest is sufficient to establish the basis of a causal connection.
In addition, it was argued that the claims of contributory fault should be dismissed, given that the defendants chose to conceal the identity of the other company, and it follows that the plaintiff's money never left their possession. The plaintiff further refers to the case law and accordingly when the plaintiff's damage is the defendant's enrichment, no contributory fault should be awarded. Moreover, it was argued that the defendants cannot claim contributory fault since a person who stole cannot claim contributory fault on the part of the stolen party, and in any case these claims are claims that the burden of proof is on the defendants, and this was not lifted.
With regard to Shabbat liability, it was argued that since he served as a director, an active and licensed manager in Global, a violation of Section 25 of the Consumer Protection Law establishes liability for him in torts. It was argued that in our case there is no difficulty of extraterritorial applicability, when the legislature intended to deal with persons or assets located within the state - and the defendants all operated from Israel; In any case, the language of the law does not support the fact that the law is not intended to protect foreigners; Moreover, when the legislature sought to exclude foreigners in this law, it did so explicitly; And finally, my crisis because the law did not intend to allow Israelis to mislead the public abroad. It was further argued - with regard to the closure of the company - that the amendment regarding the marketing of binary options was not intended for the purpose of hiding Global from harms and preventing insolvency from it - goals supported by Shabbat's testimony in which he admitted that he did not believe Global had a bank account, and also admitted that the closure of the company was done after proceedings were taken against it similar to the proceeding in question.