The bottom line: We noted above that in light of the doubt that remains in Shohat's case, Matrix (who was accused by virtue of his actions) should also be acquitted. At the same time, and more than necessary, we also addressed Matrix's claims. Matrix was charged with a single charge. No foundation was laid for the fact that it was part of the "give-and-take" that was carried out among other defendants. In view of the totality of the circumstances of the matter as detailed above, since it was not claimed that any of Shohat's superiors knew about the coordination that was attributed, taking into account the aforesaid on the question of whether Shohat acted in Matrix's favor, and in view of the actions taken by Matrix in advance to prevent violations of the Competition Law, it is possible that there were reasons to consider refraining from convicting her even if Shohat's guilt was proven.
The Eleventh Charge: The Result
- In view of all of the above, the conclusions and conclusions with respect to the eleventh charge are:
Shohat and Matrix should be acquitted of the offenses attributed to them regarding the Oranim project as a whole.
Wei and Harel should be acquitted of the offenses attributed to them regarding online pricing, which is the second part of the eleventh indictment.
Oshri and Wei and Harel should be convicted of the offenses attributed to them in relation to the Oranim Police Department, which is the first part of the eleventh indictment. This, since it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the coordination and restrictive arrangement with respect to Balam Oranim was a party to which Oshri and Harel were parties, and according to which the prices of Harel's bids and EMET were coordinated so that they would be higher than the price of Wei's offer in order to enable Levi to win Balam Oranim. Therefore, and in light of the reasons detailed above, I convict Oshri, Wei and Harel of the offense of a party to a restrictive arrangement under section 47(a)(1) of the Competition Law, as drafted on the eve of the commencement of Amendment No. 21, together with sections 2(a), 2(b)(1), 2(b)(3), 4 and 55A of the Competition Law, as well as the offense of fraudulent receipt under aggravated circumstances, under section 415 of the Penal Law. With respect to the defendant companies – Wei and Harel – the conviction is also based on section 23(a)(2) of the Penal Law.