In light of the purpose of the agreement, the reduction of the lease fees and the approval given to the plaintiff to act for this purpose, I am of the opinion that it would have been appropriate to consult with economic consultants regarding the assessment of the risks in the selection of the lease periods (see the testimony of Adv. Eidelman 74, pp. 5-12, pp. 79, lines 28-30). In any event, there is no doubt that at the end of the day the defendant paid more than she was initially required to pay, so that if the defendant had not communicated with Kotler at all, she would have paid a lower sum than the amount she actually paid.
In light of all the above, I found it appropriate to dismiss the claim.
I have not lost sight of the arguments of the parties regarding the interest and the period of savings, but in light of the result I have reached, I see no point in discussing these arguments.
Conclusion
The lawsuit is dismissed.
The plaintiff will bear the defendant's expenses in the sum of ILS 50,000. This amount will bear ILS interest as required by law from the date of the judgment until the full payment is actually made.
The secretariat will present the judgment to the parties and close the case.
Granted today, July 06, 2026, in the absence of the parties.