In this context, it should be noted that according to the case law, "the scope of the court's intervention in the banking discretion, whether 'in real time' or retroactively, will be by way of reduction, and will be done when the bank acted in a clear contravention of the accepted banking method and in the absence of business-banking logic" (Civil Case 645/05 (Hai District) Topaz Brothers Diamonds v. Bank Hapoalim in a Tax Appeal (March 26, 2007)).
The result, therefore, is that the plaintiff's petition should be dismissed at this point as well.
Financial Claim
- In the statement of claim, the plaintiff petitioned to obligate the defendant with compensation for mental anguish, as well as to pay expenses and attorney's fees in the sum of ILS 10,000 (on the other hand, in his summaries he petitioned to charge for this component in the sum of ILS 20,000).
The plaintiff did not quantify in the statement of claim the compensation for mental anguish and in any case did not pay the fee for it. In these circumstances, it is not possible to award the plaintiff compensation for this component, which is a remedy that was not claimed in his claim.
As for the sum of ILS 10,000 or ILS 20,000 to which the plaintiff petitioned, their place would have been within the framework of legal expenses had the claim been accepted.
For the avoidance of doubt, I did not find any substance in the other claims of the plaintiff in my summary, and in any case it was not found that the plaintiff is entitled to any compensation.
Conclusion
- The lawsuit is dismissed.
The plaintiff will bear the expenses of attorney's fees, which I set at the lower sum of ILS 15,000, both plus ILS interest from the date of the judgment until the date of repayment.
Payment will be made within 30 days from today.
The right to appeal to the District Court within 60 days.
Given today, January 09, 2025, in the absence of the parties.