The parties agree that all of this was not sufficient to establish grounds for cancellation of the agreement. Indeed, at this stage, Max Stock did not take the step of cancellation, and it is a good thing that it was, when it could not have been based on suspicions and rumors.
- The only evidence that made the suspicions substantiated, prima facie, is the conversation that Investigator Aviani had with Mr. Shitrit inJanuary 2018. Shitrit was active in Super-Stock, although there is a dispute as to his exact role. In any event, there is no dispute that he was familiar with the company's activities. According to Max Stock, in that conversation, Mr. Shimshon's substantial involvement was established, and Mr. Shitrit admitted this in practice.
Mr. Max explained that following his exposure to the conversation, Max Stock sent the cancellation letters and the separation demand in January 2018 (see paragraphs 23-25 of Mr. Max's counter-affidavit; paragraphs 24-27 of Mr. Max's affidavit in the franchise suit; and paragraphs 21-23 of Mr. Max's affidavit in the Ashdod lawsuit).
Does the said conversation substantiate what is claimed?
- The first disturbing point in this matter is that it appears that the transcript of the conversation as submitted is not complete. Aviani explained that the equipment he uses causes the recording to be divided into several units. In an affidavit dated January 25,2018 of Globus Translations Ltd., which was filed in the opening motion that was clarified before the Honorable Judge Yakoel z"l (N/3), six recordings are mentioned. On the other hand, in the affidavit (dated February 4,2018) of the same company, which was attached to the franchise claim (as Appendix 9), only five recordings appear. According to the defendants, as a result, a fifteen-minute recording disappeared (see the exchange in the cross-examination, p. 31 Q. 28 onwards). When Investigator Aviani was asked about this in his interrogation, he did not know how to explain what was said and noted that he had transferred all the materials in his possession (p. 32, S. 26).
This trouble is compounded by the fact that in the transcript about 145 (!) times the words "unclear" appear in the transcript. And about 65 (!) times during the transcript there are interruptions with the "... ". When Mr. Aviani was asked in his interrogation why he did not complete all the missing passages in the transcription by means of the audio recording, which he had as a backup in his pocket during that meeting in addition to filming it, he replied that it was the responsibility of the recording company (p. 36, S. 16-11).