Even if we ignore the emotional terminology used by Levy, which must be understood against the background of the close relationship between the parties and taking into account the family closeness between them, Levy expected the plaintiff to contact him and announce that he was interested in continuing to work for the company. Since the plaintiff did not do so, and in light of his behavior, Levy did not want to continue employing him.
- Moreover - At the end of the transcript, The plaintiff was recorded talking to a spokesperson whose identity has not been clarified. In this framework, the following were replaced-
"That's it, we're done, with all the sorrow and pain in all respects for all of us,..
...
Speaker A: Everything is complicated...
Yoram: Yes... Just amazing things, you see? Nope. It's not good, so there's none..."
The plaintiff's words at the end of the meeting, even if they were general and unexplicit, also indicate that the plaintiff left the conversation with a sense of mutual agreement.
- It appears from the compilation that the plaintiff was fired from his job in light of Levy's words, In the heat of the debate from the day 21.3.11, And bearing in mind that after this event, Levy did not contact the plaintiff, He did not make it clear to him that he was desirable and required to return to work for the company. The plaintiff also cut off all contact with the company after that conversation and even contacted its customers about two days later in circumstances that were not fully clarified, Thus, he expressed his opinion that he was not interested in continuing to work in the company's ranks. In a conversation from today 28.3.11 The plaintiff did not claim that he was fired from his job and did not raise any claim against the termination of his employment. All he claimed was that he himself did not resign from his job. Also, The plaintiff clarified that he did not contact the company's customers in order to compete with it and accepted rumors that were circulating about him. In addition to this, The plaintiff did not ask to continue working for the company at all, even for the notice period. Hence, the plaintiff agreed that his employment would be terminated immediately and did not raise any claim that his dismissal was illegal or tainted by any defect. In light of the aforesaid, the termination of the plaintiff's employment should be regarded as"Dismissal by Consent".
In this regard, it was ruled (Employment Appeal (National) 1036/00 Zuckerman- Nesher Municipality, [Posted inNevo], 3.12.02):