According to the terms of the agreement, the defendant was supposed to pay the plaintiff's salary, within 7 days from the date of the savings. Since on March 7, 2019, the Tel Aviv District Court gave effect to a judgment on the mediation agreement with the Tel Aviv Municipality, the defendant was required to pay the plaintiff's salary no later than March 15, 2019. The defendant paid Adv. Meyuhas' salary, but did not pay the plaintiff's salary.
In respect of the benefit granted to the defendant during the first lease period, the defendant was required to pay the plaintiff ILS 56,658, constituting 7.5% of the amount of savings - ILS 755,447. With the addition of exceptional interest, as obligated by the agreement for the period 15.12.2021 - 15.3.2019 and a tax appeal - a total of ILS 89,993 .
For the benefit granted to the defendant during the second lease period, the defendant was required to pay the plaintiff ILS 81,880 (constituting 7.5% of the amount of savings - ILS 1,091,737). With the addition of exceptional interest for the period 15.3.2019-15.12.2021 and a tax appeal - a total of ILS 130,055 .
Quoted from Nevoin relation to the remainder of the lease period, the plaintiff set the sum at ILS 361,141, which includes exceptional interest for the period 15.3.2019-15.12.2021 and VAT.
The plaintiff's requests to the defendant demanding payment of her salary were not answered, and the defendant, for her part, asked Kotler to send a detailed description of the treatment he performed. According to the plaintiff, from the outset the defendant knew that Kotler's role was limited to marketing the idea and locating clients, when it was clear and agreed that his salary would be paid in addition to and in addition to the payment to the lawyer, who would handle the defendant's case.
The defendant was entitled to hire the services of any other attorney according to its liking, but it chose to reduce the costs involved in contracting with Kotler, by way of the certification of a privileged attorney on Kotler's recommendation. From the outset, it was known that the legal treatment, in exhausting the defendant's rights, would be done by an attorney and not by Kotler. The defendant had the choice not to engage with Kotler and not to join the group of clients, which he formulated. Instead, the defendant chose to enter into an agreement with Kotler, undertook to pay his salary, joined the group he formulated, received the services of Adv. Meyuhas, and enjoyed the tremendous benefit, which was ultimately obtained for the group, among which the defendant is a member.