Q: Okay. Now you mention in your affidavit 34 times, I counted, that all the media and everything you had to say to Jinli you did it by GIBThat is, through Global, which is actually Yoav Hasson's company, right?
A: Most of the media was conducted through Yoav Hasson, many times key points in the negotiations were conducted directly."
[...]
Adv. Grady: Before signing the contract, show me the times that you spoke directly with Ginley or anyone on her behalf, not through Yoav Hasson.
The witness, Mr. A. Hadad: Again, it is my practice not to conduct negotiations in different languages with potential clients in different countries before signing the contract.
Adv. Grady: And so, what is the answer to the question?
Adv. Sivan: What's the question?
The Honorable Judge Anisman: No.
Attorney Grady: You never spoke to them.
The witness, Mr. A. Hadad: It may be so.
Q: And so you confirm that you didn't talk to them?
- I may have communicated with him before, I don't remember, but..."
- Thus, the testimony of Mr. Haddad on behalf of the plaintiffs is sufficient to establish the conclusion that Mr. Hasson, through Global Brands, was the sole representative of the plaintiffs in Israel for all intents and purposes already at the stage of negotiations that preceded the signing of the license agreement, and that the communication during this period between the plaintiffs and the Ginley Company and Mr. Ginley took place mainly with Mr. Hasson, who was presented as a negotiator on behalf of the plaintiffs.
- At this point, it is not superfluous to note that even Mr. Hasson's affidavit submitted on behalf of the defendants is consistent with and supports the manner in which Mr. Hadad's words were presented. Thus, he declared that the plaintiffs had never negotiated with companies in Israel, and that all the activity in connection with the brand was conducted through him and through Global Brands (paragraphs 8, 11 and 15.1 of Mr. Hasson's affidavit). As will be detailed below, the extent of Mr. Hasson's significant involvement as the sole representative of the plaintiffs was not limited to this, and it was very significant even throughout the life of the license agreement.
Mr. Hasson as a central and significant factor throughout the years of the license agreement
- From the fabric of testimonies and evidence that was placed before the court, the clear conclusion emerges that Mr. Hasson was the authorized representative of the plaintiffs for almost all intents and purposes in the realm of commercial-business conduct, as well as the issuer and importer for them in their relationship with Ginley / Don Gilley. In fact, Mr. Hasson was the only party on behalf of the plaintiffs against whom the defendants operated, who did not act directly with any of the plaintiffs throughout the years of the license agreement.
- With regard to the approval of the models and the ongoing work within the framework of the license agreement: It was proven in a coherent tapestry of evidence that the ongoing execution of the license agreement and the approval of the products was carried out with Mr. Hasson as the sole representative of the plaintiffs vis-à-vis Ginelli / Don Gilly. Haddad confirmed in his affidavit that at the stage prior to the production of the products and at the production stage itself, the process of approving the models was carried out through Global Brands, when the defendants acted directly with Mr. Hasson and transferred the materials to him, and he acted to obtain approval from the plaintiffs (paragraphs 44-48 of Mr. Hadad's affidavit).
- Also at the hearing of the injunction in the previous lawsuit, Mr. Haddad admitted that all the ongoing communications, including even regarding the extension of the engagement within the framework of the option under the license agreement, were carried out through Global Brands and Mr. Hasson as his representative (in his words - "our agent"). This is what Mr. Haddad confirmed in the course of the hearing on the application for an injunction in the hearing that took place in the previous claim, on September 16, 2015 (pp. 7, paras. 7-8):
"Q. Did Jinli ever notify you of the exercise of the option?
- There was very little direct communication, everything was done through Hasson"
And later on (p. 8, paras. 19-20):