Caselaw

Civil Case (Tel Aviv) 58538-05-19 Michael Benz and 52 others v. Appeal of the Financial Case – Supreme Court Guy Nof - part 37

May 29, 2026
Print

In any case, I am not required to decide the question of negligence in this matter.  The plaintiffs also admit in their summaries (at paragraph 408) that the lack of trust did not actually cause damage, since Ms. Or eventually completed the purchase of the land from its original owners (the Campbell Company).  And one of the main functions of the trust mechanism was to ensure the buyers' money and to ensure that they would be used to purchase the land.  Hence, there is no need to decide the issue in the circumstances of the present case.

  1. It should be noted that in the summaries of the reply (at paragraphs 115-117) the plaintiffs argued that a fictitious loyalty mechanism was included in the joining form, but that this was an expansion of a façade that had no place.

The plaintiffs did not act to cancel the agreements within a reasonable time after they were concluded and after they could have noticed that they had been misrepresented, in their own opinion

  1. So far, I have rejected the plaintiffs' claims that they were presented with false representations regarding the nature of the transaction at hand. Still, even if I had walked with them, after the signing, they would certainly have been able to review the documents, demand them as long as they had not kept a copy, and delve into them. Given the time that had elapsed, they could have noticed the large gap between what was promised to them, according to them, and what was stated in these agreements.  They could have turned to legal counsel to protect their rights and take action to cancel the deal.

As we have seen, a process in this spirit began to take shape at the end of 2011, and an application was made on their behalf through their attorneys from the S.  Horowitz & Co.  (see above in paragraph 16).  However, here is the place to mention the provision of section 8 of the Contracts Law (Remedies for Breach of Contract), 5731-1970, according to which the agreement may be cancelled "within a reasonable time after [the party to the contract] becomes aware of the breach."

Previous part1...3637
38...66Next part