Indeed, Mr. Abu Razeq testified in favor of the plaintiff that a large transaction was executed between him and the plaintiff in the framework of which all the goods that are the subject of the transaction in question were sold. However, he did not specify the amount of merchandise sold, claiming that it was a business secret and that he was not interested in revealing the information, noting that the merchandise was worth more than ILS 1 million. He further noted that prior to the dispute between the parties, the plaintiff had "withdrawn" goods in excess of ILS 1 million for the large transaction between them (in the transcript, pp. 109, 10-19 and 113, 5-13).
Mr. Abu Razeq's testimony was general and was not supported by the references that were likely in the plaintiff's possession, and at least she was able to obtain them, in order to substantiate the claim that all the alleged goods were indeed purchased from the manufacturer for the defendant. To this it should be added that Mr. Abu Razeq also testified that he did not know where the goods were stored after they left his factory (in the transcript at p. 115, para. 9), so his testimony does not help to substantiate the plaintiff's version that all the goods ordered for the defendant are in her warehouses, if at all. The weight of Mr. Razek's testimony was also examined in light of the plaintiff's refusal to bring him to testify and the difficulty involved in bringing him to testify by the defendant. In these circumstances, I did not find that his testimony was sufficient to convince him that the quantity of goods claimed for the defendant was indeed produced.
- In addition, the plaintiff did not present any documents or evidence attesting to the amount of goods that were allegedly supplied to the defendant in practice.
Mr. Meisler explained in his testimony that the transaction with the defendant was carried out in accordance with the mechanism whereby it acted regarding the purchase and sale of the products to its customers in general and to the defendant in particular, according to which: the plaintiff purchases products from the manufacturer for the purpose of the matter, in the amount of ILS 2 million, on the basis of an order made by the defendant with an oral agreement with the plaintiff during meetings between them (there is no form or other correspondence on the matter) in accordance with what the defendant was supposed to sell over a period of about a year or two. and the plaintiff gave the defendant in advance to pay the amount of the value of the order in installments because its purpose was to expand projects in addition to the clinic in Rishon to reach abroad - Georgia, the Balkans, Arab countries, etc., and also in order to receive the discounts from the manufacturer's factory in order at a cash price from the factory (in the transcript at pp. 40, 16-30).