At the end of the day, contrary to Gutman's position, I did not accept the request to completely prohibit Lahav from participating in the company's management, but rather determined that he should be allowed to integrate into the company's management in a gradual and controlled manner in order to avoid causing shocks to the company, given the fact that Lahav was detached from the company's affairs and the person who actually managed the company was Gutman. Accordingly, I allowed Lahav to enter the company's offices with certain restrictions and qualifications and set an outline for his integration into a managerial position in the company (paragraph 77 of the decision).
On April 13, 2023, a decision was made regarding the outline that was determined. In that decision, I determined that the balance point that was valid in the past no longer exists, mainly due to Lahav's conduct. I pointed to three reasons: First, it turned out that even though Lahav was allowed to reach the company's offices, and despite the fact that he had complained in the past that he had been prevented from coming to the company, he did not come to the company's offices even once. Second, the accumulation of unusual incidents in which Shalhav was a partner prior to the filing of the lawsuit. Third, it turned out that Lahav was behind the ambush, detective, and tracing operations carried out against Gutman. As a result, Gutman took action against Lahav under the Prevention of Threatening Harassment Law, 5762-2001, in which it was determined that Lahav was indeed "behind the ambushes, detectives, and tracing [Gutman] carried out by the investigators who were documented by the investigation agency hired by Gutman," which were carried out in the midst of the proceeding. The Magistrate's Court even removed Lahav from Gutman's place of residence. Finally, I found that the lack of trust between the parties has intensified, and this is evident in all the moves that the company seeks to promote, first and foremost the signing of the financial statements. In light of these words, I forbade Lahav from taking on positions in the company's management, and I also forbade him from being in the company's offices and being in contact with entities connected to it.
- The decision is dated April 13, 2023.
As part of this decision, a number of issues were discussed, including Keshet Lahav's request to appoint a "decisive director". Lahav's request was accepted. Accordingly, I ordered the appointment of CPA Yair Shalhav as a decisive director and determined that he would also serve as chairman of the board of directors. In my decision, I noted that "in the situation that has been created, which is based on a lack of trust between Lahav and Gutman, there is no possibility of making decisions that are within the authority of the board of directors. The relationship between the parties has reached a dead end and the parties are unable to make decisions that are critical to the company's functioning."