Demolition and reconstruction also has financial costs, and is accompanied by the need to completely shut down the operation of the café for several months, and this required Saul's prior consent even before the agreements were signed, and such consent was not given.
We emphasize that this is a franchise agreement and the sale of a café activity. Without a license to operate a café, Saul would not have signed the agreements, and would not have paid the amount of consideration demanded by the partnership.
- As a result of this determination, on June 16, 2016, the concession agreement and the sale agreement Lawfully cancelled by Sol [Appendix 24 to the lawsuit], after on May 9, 2016, Sol sent a warning prior to the cancellation of the agreements [Appendix 22 to the Claim]:
- The Rothschild Café Partnership claim for subsistence compensation in the amount of ILS 1,069,191 for loss of profits for a period of 8 years and 8 months, the period remaining until the termination of the franchise [section 75b.5 of the counterclaim] is dismissed.
- The Rothschild Café Partnership claim in the amount of ILS 569,000, for non-payment of the full consideration in the sale and concession agreement [section 75b(b1) of the counterclaim] - is rejected.
- The claim of the Rothschild Café Partnership in the amount of ILS 275,000, due to the delay in payment of the consideration in the transaction [section 75b(b8) of the counterclaim] - is dismissed.
- The claim of the Rothschild Café Partnership for the payment of royalties with respect to the period after the cancellation, after June 16, 2016 [section 75b(b3) of the counterclaim] - is rejected.
- The claim of the Rothschild Cafe Partnership for the payment of agreed compensation for non-submission of reports for the period after the cancellation, after June 16, 2016 [section 75b(b7) of the counterclaim] - is rejected.
- The claim of the Rothschild Cafe Partnership for payment of compensation for the delay in payment of royalties from July 16 to December 16, for the period after the cancellation, after June 16, 2016 [section 75b(b8) of the counterclaim] - is dismissed.
- The Rothschild Café Partnership's claim for compensation for non-payment of advertising fees in relation to the period from June 16, 2016 to December 30, 2016 [section 75b(b8) of the counterclaim] is dismissed.
- Since Shull lawfully terminated the agreements on June 16, 2016, defendants 1-5, jointly and severally, as part of a restitution remedy, should be obligated to pay the plaintiffs the sums they paid in and during the transaction, according to a calculation that will be detailed below. The claim against defendant 6 is dismissed.
Section 20(a) of the Partnership Ordinance [New Version] 5735-1975 provides: