Adv. A. Seroussi: They didn't pay 3.6 million in person, I'm not talking about the fines?
The Honorable Judge 10. Shaked: The essence of the payment was the essence of taxation as a partnership?
The witness, Mr. Y. Elron: Not all of a sudden.
(p. 197 of the proclamation, s. 17 - p. 198, s. 8).
E2 Absence of a written agreement - as opposed to a written partnership agreement between the parties to a particular venture
- There is no dispute that the parties did not enter into a written partnership agreement between them, and the plaintiff even explicitly admitted this, inter alia when he defined in paragraph 31 of his affidavit the relationship of the parties as a partnership that was "based on oral agreement and the relationship of trust between us, and we did not make written agreements..." (He even admitted this in his interrogation: p. 125 of the transcript, paras. 10-25). Admittedly, the law does not require that a partnership agreement be drawn up in writing, its absence still constitutes a justification against the plaintiff's claims.
- This is even more true when it became clear that with respect to some of the parties' activity, an explicit partnership agreement was drawn up and signed in 2012, between companies on behalf of the plaintiff and defendant 1, in relation to the venture they called "the solar roof" (P/17). The plaintiff did not know how to explain this:
Adv. Weiner: Can you explain to me why you knew how to make a real partnership agreement regarding the solar roof and make it clear that you are really partners here, as opposed to owning shares in the various companies?
The witness, Mr. Peretz: No, no.
Adv. Weiner: You don't know how to explain.
The witness, Mr. Peretz: I don't know how to explain.
(p. 125 of the transcript, paras. 1-6).
- The plaintiff did not give a satisfactory answer to this inconsistency, presenting two possible reasons - neither of which is convincing. The first reason was that this was due to a deterioration in the relations between the parties after the first arrest in 2011 (p. 125 of the transcript, para. 26). After being asked about it again, he offered a different explanation:
The witness, Mr. Peretz: My explanation, now that I'm thinking about it, Adi at first did it only for himself, I told him, 'Come and add me too,' because I'm the owner of the property downstairs, and that's why it was born.