Automotive
- There is no dispute that over the years the company made vehicles available to the plaintiff and they were registered in its name only. The last vehicle used by the plaintiff - III'Yp Grand Chen'Green M.R. 94-542-68, Acquired by the company, Imported into Israel by personal import and registered in the plaintiff's name. As of January 2011 The plaintiff's pay slip detailed a component "Vehicle Value". According to the plaintiff, this is a private car that was given to him as a gift (Section 130 To the plaintiff's affidavit). According to the company, this is a vehicle purchased with the company's funds, was registered in the library and was her property. According to her version, The vehicle was registered in the plaintiff's name since it was imported by personal import, However, it was not given as a gift, and the mere registration with the licensing office does not constitute proof of ownership of it.
- In the lawsuit before us, the company petitioned for the return of the vehicle and proper usage fees. Since the vehicle was sold after the lawsuit was filed and the foreclosure imposed on it expired, Her petition is irrelevant and an order was even issued to split the remedies in the matter.
Although the issue is not necessary for the purpose of the decision before us, We found a neighbor to discuss, The plaintiff's conduct regarding the vehicle indicates the nature of his conduct in all matters relating to his work at the company and his relationship with Levy.
- The rule is that registering the ownership of a vehicle, which by nature is movable, It is a declarative registration and not a constitutional one, and therefore there is no impediment to presenting evidence to contradict the registration at the Licensing Office (Civil Appeal Authority 5379/95 Sahar Insurance Company in Tax Appeal v. Israel Discount Bank Ltd., IsrSC 51 (4) 464, 473 (1997)).
As stated, over the years the company made vehicles available for the plaintiff's use, they were registered in its name and were its exclusive property. The vehicle in question was also purchased with the company's funds, and it appears that its registration in the plaintiff's name was for reasons of savings and in view of the fact that it was imported by personal import (see the plaintiff's testimony on page 15 of the transcript, line 23 to page 16, line 10). In addition, the company did not report to the tax authorities about the gift of the vehicle to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff did not even protest when the company began to include in the pay slip a "vehicle value" component, indicating that he did not own the vehicle. (page 16 of the transcript, line 13 to page 17, line 1).