As I have already noted and noted the bank's failures in bringing relevant witnesses and evidence, it is sufficient to establish a negative evidentiary presumption that acts against its version, and accordingly, if the witnesses had testified or the evidence had been presented, it would have been sufficient to support the plaintiffs' claims.
Moreover, I am of the opinion that the breach of the duty imposed on the Bank in accordance with the Documents Disclosure Order is sufficient to add "sin upon crime" as it constitutes improper conduct following an improper proceeding.
- A summary of the above shows that in the process of making the bank's decision regarding the closure of the account, there were material flaws, including, in particular, the lack of transparency and the failure to allow customers to exercise their right to argue. Accordingly, I do not believe that the bank's decision meets the realm of reasonableness, and therefore I determine that the decision is null and void.
- The third stage - the conduct during the legal process;
In the framework of the legal proceeding, and as detailed below, the "Know the Customer" proceeding continued between the plaintiffs and the bank to clarify the bank's suspicions. Among other things, the plaintiffs were transferred to the bank, many documents and also, in the course of their cross-examination, when the witnesses on behalf of the plaintiffs were confronted with various claims of the bank, in some cases, they had an explanation for the bank's questions. With regard to the addition of documents and information as they were in the framework of the legal proceeding, I find it necessary to emphasize already now - their presentation and their details do not establish a position, and certainly not rivets, on the question of whether the production of documents by the client in the framework of the legal proceeding is sufficient to cure his failure to do so in the framework of a lawful proceeding that took place by the bank. At the same time, given my determination that the proceeding that took place by the bank was improper, I am required to examine the documents that were transferred after the notice of closure due to two main reasons - one in order to examine what would have been the results of the proceeding had it been lawfully conducted with regard to the bank's suspicions, and this is an additional aspect regarding the reasonableness of its decision, and the second - in order to decide the question of the continued activity of the accounts from now on. In this context, I will precede a decision for reasoning - after examining the material and information that was invented by the customers, I determine that it is sufficient to satisfy the mind and remove the suspicions as they arose in the heart of the bank.