Civil Case 63480-06-22 A.D. Peleg Consulting and Investments in Tax Appeal v. Splitite Ltd.

Prior to a lawsuit in which the plaintiff petitions for the court's determination that the defendant breached the agreements between them, and subsequently, to issue an order instructing the defendant to allocate to the plaintiff options for the purchase of the defendant's shares, to which the plaintiff is entitled in respect of the defendant's two public offerings on the Sydney Stock Exchange in Australia, to pay a commission to which the plaintiff is entitled in respect of the second offering of the defendant's shares, and to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused to it as a result of the fact that the options were not allocated to the plaintiff at the contractual date.  (In the article  I  will point out that in the hearing on July 8, 2024, the plaintiff's counsel announced that due to changes in the defendant company, the plaintiff does not insist on the remedy of the allocation of shares, but only on the monetary remedy).

Introduction to the relevant facts – agreed upon or as proved in the course of the proceeding;

1. The plaintiff is A.D. Peleg Consulting and Investments in Tax Appeals (hereinafter: "the Plaintiff"), is an Israeli company controlled by Guy Peleg (hereinafter: "Peleg").
2. The defendant Splitit Ltd (hereinafter: "Splitit" or the "Company" or "the Defendant"), is a fintech company that has developed technology that enables the execution of a purchase in a payment plan. The company was incorporated in Israel and its shares were traded on the relevant dates of the lawsuit on the Sydney Stock Exchange (ASX).  I will note that during the hearing following the merger of the company, it became a private company (see the statement of the plaintiff's counsel in the hearing of July 2, 2024).  The company's previous name was Pay It Simple, and later the company's name was changed to Split It.  At the relevant times of the lawsuit, Mr. Gil Don (hereinafter: "Don") served as the company's CEO (there is no dispute that then as well as now, Don was a shareholder in the company) and Mr. Alon Feit (hereinafter: "Fight"), was one of the founders of the company, a shareholder in the company, and during the period relevant to the lawsuit he served as a director of the company.
3. As will be detailed below, the main dispute between the parties revolved around the plaintiff's right to receive options to purchase the company's shares. The dispute focuses mainly on the interpretation of the set of agreements between the parties, including in particular the clause – which is included in some of the agreements signed between the parties – which states:

"The company shall also give the Finder options in the actual investment valuation for a period of 12 months.  The amount of options shall be equivalent to investing all Finder's Fee back in the company"