Therefore, I determine that an accountant who will be appointed must include the calculation of the cost of the components of "bookkeeping and auditing" and "honors and gifts", within the framework of the indirect expenses mechanism set out in paragraphs 2(f( and 2(k( of the agreement.
The Weight and Admissibility of CPA Schlepper's Opinion
- In his summaries, Mr. Zaruk petitioned that the court determine that the opinion of CPA Schlefer was inadmissible as evidence, since he was personally involved in the events that are the subject of the lawsuit, and provided services to a bonus company and made all the calculations between the parties.
As can be seen from the analysis so far, I have not found any reason to order the disqualification of the opinion. At the same time, on the merits, it raised difficulties on which I have argued, which led to the plaintiff's assessment of the various elements of the dispute. It should also be taken into account that in any case, an accountant will be appointed to conduct the exhaustive calculation. Therefore, I did not find the opinion to be invalid as requested.
Dismissal of the main claim against Mr. Goldian
- The plaintiff, who contracted with a bonus company, seeks to impose personal liability on Mr. Goldian. This is what he wants to do in two ways. The first is the imposition of personal liability on an officer of the company; The second is lifting the veil that will make it possible to impose liability on the controlling shareholder.
Neither way will work.
The imposition of personal liability on an officer of a corporation will be possible in exceptional cases (for more information, see my judgment in Civil Case (Tel Aviv District( 41953-01-17 Knefler v. Nehemia (published in the databases; 2026( (hereinafter: the Knefler case). In the circumstances of the case, Mr. Zaruk alleges, in fact, that he has breached contractual obligations towards him. According to him, he was not paid the consideration that he had agreed to receive.