The plaintiff testified to this:
"... Two investors from the company approached me, told me, 'Itamar, we are considering investing in a property that costs 60,000 euros, we want you to come and invest
With us, with us, we have a realtor, she brought us the deal,' I said, 'Bring the
The deal, we'll consider, I'll check, I don't know, it's also 20,000 euros, but I'm still
I want to check,' they even came to the company's offices, we sat down. Later on, he also said
If you have any, if they have another deal, let him add it as well. I checked the deal,
It was an intermediary way, I agreed to invest my money with them, I invested in the same property
With them, and that's it. I have never recruited clients, I have never taken clients' money, for
Matters of details."
He later claimed that he conducted the meetings with the investor in the defendant's offices with the knowledge of the manager
Zach Asher even told the plaintiff that if they brought more deals, he would share it with him as well.
The plaintiff claimed that this was a building and not a "commercial property" and therefore this did not contradict the
The employment agreement.
- We do not have the tools to determine whether the alleged investment constitutes a breach of the employment agreement. It should be noted that the burden in this matter is on the defendant and that the defendant did not prove that it was a commercial property.
In addition, in the affidavit, the plaintiff claimed that he had shared the matter with the defendant's managers, but the defendant chose to submit an affidavit of Yagil Manovitz only, and not of Zach, which would contradict the plaintiff's claim.
In any event, the defendant did not prove that she suffered damage and did not prove the amount of the damage. And more - There is no support for the question of when the transaction was made, whether during the employment period or towards the end of the period.
- In light of the aforesaid, the defendant's claim regarding the damages caused to her by the plaintiff was not proven.
- Finally, the plaintiff's claim is accepted as follows:
The defendant will pay the plaintiff:
- Compensation for non-pension contributions in the amount of ILS 52,190.
- Severance pay in the amount of ILS 228,122.
- Salary for the month of July 2021 in the amount of ILS 11,398.
- Prior notice in the amount of ILS 22,796 was replaced.
- Redemption of freedom in the amount of ILS 43,176.
- Convalescence pay in the amount of ILS 10,584.
- The plaintiff demanded payment of severance pay for the severance pay and for the salary for the month of July. After reviewing all the material in the file, we set the Helena compensation on linkage and interest differentials as required by law from the date the claim was filed until the actual payment.
- All of the above amounts will bear linkage and interest differentials as required by law from the date of filing the claim until the actual payment.
- In addition, the defendant will provide the plaintiff with a letter for the release of all the funds deposited in the health fund, and will sign all the documents required for this purpose. Severance pay funds deposited in the fund will be deducted from the amount of severance pay detailed above.
- Taking into account the results of the proceeding, the defendant will bear the expenses of attorney's fees in the amount of ILS 17,000 as of today.
It was given today, 29/7/25 , in the absence of the parties and will be sent to them.