In light of this rule, the courts did indeed criticize plea bargains in which the organs were dismissed, and the corporation alone bore responsibility and punishment for the offense committed. Thus, in the case of the railway, the question of whether to intervene in a plea bargain made with the railways following an accident in which five passengers were killed, according to which only the train would bear responsibility and not the officers. The court decided not to intervene. Despite this, the Honorable Justice D. Barak-Erez added the following (paragraph 2 of her judgment):
"The attribution of criminal liability to a corporation does not, as a rule, negate the criminal liability of flesh and blood persons who acted within its boundaries...The uneasiness aroused by the plea bargain does not stem from the fact that "there are no culprits," but rather from the inner tension inherent in the statement: "There are no guilty, but in fact there are." The plea bargain preserves at its center the prosecution for the offense of causing death by negligence.... But he attributes it to the corporation only. Of the original defendants, who hold positions at the executive level of the corporation – two were completely omitted, and another defendant is charged with a general negligence offense without a consequential aspect related to the accident itself."
However, the Honorable Justice D. Barak Erez adds that there will be cases in which the conviction of the corporation itself will be important (paragraph 6 of her judgment):
"The significance of convicting the corporation solely for offenses varies according to the type of offenses and the circumstances in which they were committed. Corporate criminal liability is of great importance in the context of the commission of economic offenses that ostensibly promote the corporation's business interests. In this case, the offenses are committed for the corporation, and imposing criminal liability on it constitutes an effective deterrent against their perpetration. The corporation's criminal liability is also important in situations in which it is not possible to identify the corporation's employees who actually committed offenses..... Moreover, the significance of a criminal conviction of a corporation is increasing when it comes to a business corporation operating in a competitive market. In such a case, the conviction of the corporation may have an impact on the value of its shares and may even limit it in business activity, since there are parties that prefer not to engage with corporations that have been convicted of criminal offenses, as is also reflected in certain pieces of legislation (see, for example: the Public Entities Transactions Law, 5736-1976)."