Second, the legal validity of the commercial terms document must be examined in accordance with its language and the formula of the context.
Third, it is necessary to examine whether there are later indications in the conduct of the parties that attest to acceptance of the conduct or whether the parties believed that the commercial terms document obligated them despite its language.
Fourth, it is necessary to examine whether the commercial terms document meets the requirement of specificity.
Fifth, it is necessary to examine whether the conditions suspended in the commercial terms document have been met.
- 1. There was no "acceptance" on the part of Shufersal
- The first question that must be discussed is whether the commercial terms document has been perfected into a binding agreement through offer and acceptance.
- Shufersal did not send Shem a notice of acceptance - the commercial terms document was drafted by Shufersal itself and signed by Geshem. At the same time, the document explicitly states that "the name of the proposer: Shamgar Vaknin." I will mention that Shamgar is Yossi's partner in the rights and management of Geshem (and he was also the one who declared in the application for an injunction in the proceeding).
- This wording of the commercial terms document by Shufersal indicates that it chose not to define itself as a bidder. Shufersal wanted rain to be defined as a bidder, so that the right of acceptance would remain in Shufersal's hands. Shufersal's retrospective claims that it should be considered the bidder because it drafted the commercial terms document contradict the language of the document head-on and I did not see them as a contractor.
- Hence, Rain is proposed. Shufersal did not prove that it had "accepted" the commercial terms document. Shlomi could not confirm in his cross-examination whether and how Shufersal informed Shem that it was receiving the commercial terms document. When asked about this, Shlomi replied as follows:
"Q: ... Is there you can show us an official Shufersal document with an official authorized signature of Shufersal as there is such a document of commercial terms a parallel document in which Shufersal sends us an email message an official letter Fax what you want to say The document from 8/5/19 is acceptable to us, we get it what is known as a reception message Is there a simple or not?