I will not be able to accept his testimony, and I reject it. It was not mentioned in his affidavit. Beyond that; The correspondence between Adv. Mansour, his attorney, and Adv. Aharonson shows that their dates are dated October 25, 2012 (see: Appendix 15 to Mr. Oved's affidavit, on pages 50-51 of the appendices to his affidavit). In other words, the exchange took place before the date of his signing of the sale agreement, which was signed on November 4, 2012. It should be noted that the sale agreement of Ms. Mimi Oved (his cousin), which Mr. Oved signed on her behalf, was also signed on October 28, 2012, after this exchange.
When confronted in his cross-examination with the dates of the sale agreements, he replied that they were filled out retroactively and hastily, and did not reflect the actual date of signing (p. 253, Q. 15-14; 255, S. 15). This is a difficult argument, according to which the documents have been retro-dated. This claim was not substantiated, and as stated, there was no mention of it in his affidavit.
Hence, it is possible to establish a finding that he did consult with his counsel, and decided to enter into agreements despite her recommendation. He certainly had a few days to study them himself.
- Yitzhak Kamar (plaintiff 17) admitted in his affidavit that after he signed the joining form, he requested and received the sale agreement, the sharing agreement and the letter of undertaking, six days before the signing meeting. He also noted that he had succeeded in making a change to the letter of undertaking prior to the signing meeting regarding the project's timetables (paragraphs 7-9 of his affidavit, and in his testimony: p. 408, s. 410-6, s. 26). Mr. Kamar added in his testimony that he would not have come to sign a contract before he had received it in advance, so that he would have violated it (p. 408, S. 14-19), and that he had read the agreements and understood that there was some risk inherent in the transaction (p. 409, S. 5-4).
- Or Eliyahu (plaintiff 19) claimed in his affidavit (in paragraph 14) that he was not given documents before the signing meeting, and that he did not know what he was expected to sign. On the other hand, in his testimony, Mr. Eliyahu changed his version and claimed that he did not remember whether he asked to receive the agreements before the meeting, and if he did not ask for it, he did not remember why he did not ask (p. 352, Q. 34-25).
- Benzi Bar, the father of Ms. Shir Bar (plaintiff 24), admitted in his affidavit (in paragraph 5) that he received the agreements before the signing meeting. Later in his interrogation, he confirmed that he had read the agreements before signing them, and even tried to change them, and one change was accepted (p. 46, S. 25-11; 48, S. 6; 53, S. 13 onwards; 54, S. 18-10).
- Pardo Sivan (plaintiff 25), who testified on her behalf and on behalf of her husband (plaintiff 26), admitted in her affidavit and testimony that at the time of signing the joining form, she requested and received the agreements in order to read them before the signing meeting, and that she had read them "more than once or twice" before the signing, and made comments, some of which had been inserted (see: paragraphs 9 and 11 of the affidavit, and in her testimony: p. 72, Q. 13 - 73, S. 15; 75, S. 14-10).
- Rinat Cohen (plaintiff 30) and her partner, Mr. David Cohen (plaintiff 31), admitted in their affidavits that they had reviewed the joining form there before signing it (see: paragraphs 8-9 of Mr. Cohen's affidavit, and paragraphs 9-10 of Ms. Cohen's affidavit). It should be recalled that the application form is three pages long.
The Cohens noted in their affidavit that the signing meeting of the agreements took place six days after the signing of the opt-in form (see: paragraphs 5 and 11 of Mr. Cohen's affidavit, and paragraphs 5 and 13 of Ms. Cohen's affidavit).