A: Yes
Q: Yes, and -- Your brother told you you need to cancel, right?
A: But I canceled it, I am me,
Q: I ask, he told you that I did, you also canceled the but. -- Canceled, told you you had to cancel the deal? You, the sheikh, have to tell the truth
A: No, no, no, no.
Q: Isn't it?
A: No one
Q: No one?
A: No, no --, -- He didn't tell me
Q: Oh? Who told you, one of the brothers? Say names
A: I don't want to say"
(p. 48, lines 4-9 and 35-39 and p. 49, lines 1-11 of the Talmud. See also at p. 52, paras. 7-8 of the Talmud).
- Attorney S.'s testimony also does not support the defendant's claim of disgraceful conduct. Attorney S. testified that the morning after the transaction, he reported the transaction to the Tax Authority, and that on the same day:
"That same day, the brother, the defendant, came to me, and he told me that he and his sister had gotten into a very serious dispute and he described to me a situation of disgraceful behavior towards him by the nurse and he asked me to stop it, that he was canceling the gift and that I should immediately stop handling the transfer. I understood from his description that we fall within the definition of section 5C of the Gift Law, and according to the law, I must stop handling the transfer, it was the next day. After that, the nurse didn't show up for the meeting, didn't pay my fees, ignored me for 12 years. Until last year, she contacted me, not through her husband or through my friend attorney Zaki Kamal in the letters attached to the statement of claim, and we also attached them to my statement of defense." (at p. 19, 4-12 of the Talmud. See also at p. 25, paras. 12-21 of the Constitution).
Adv. S., like the defendant, did not elaborate on the disgraceful behavior that occurred immediately after the signing and I found his testimony incoherent, while on the one hand, he claimed time and time again that he had summoned the plaintiff to a meeting in order to inform her of the cancellation of the transaction, which was allegedly carried out the next day, and to have her sign an affidavit of cancellation, and on the other hand, he testified that the plaintiff canceled the transaction in her conduct when she did not show up for a meeting scheduled after a week in which she should have received vouchers for tax payments (at p. 30, paras. 17-39). and p. 31, paras. 1-20 of the Constitution).