As stated, Mr. Max did not accept this and remained convinced that it was Mr. Shimshon who invested directly in the Super Stock Company, and that his brother was nothing more than a straw man intended to hide the traces of it.
- Shimshon was also behind the matter in the framework of this proceeding. He admitted that he had helped his brother, Michael, to purchase shares in the Super Stock Company. He testified that there was no written agreement between the two for this purpose (pp. 192, Q. 34-35), and further admitted that they did not agree on the terms of the loan, including the interest and the format of the repayment payments. He also testified that as far as he was concerned, even if his brother did not repay it, it would be fine for him (193, Q. 3-1).
These things do not make the loan fictitious. We are not dealing with a lender and a borrower who are alien to each other, but rather two brothers. Therefore, this version of Mr. Shimshon should not be rejected out of hand, and it cannot serve as a basis for determining that Mr. Shimshon is the owner of a superstock company, or that he himself invested in the company, and that his brother is nothing more than a "coverage".
- Shimshon also admitted that he had begun to examine the economic data in order to make an initial examination of the feasibility of investing in a superstock company. According to him, he did so in order to help his brother. There was no due diligence. Mr. Shimshon, together with two other officials at Hodaya Holdings, looked at "a few excels" for less than an hour, after which he recommended that his brother Michael contact the accounting firm of BDO, in order to conduct a serious due diligence. However, his brother did not heed his advice, and purchased the shares of Super Stock without due diligence (p. 195, Q. 26-196 , Q. 31).
From here to the proof of Max's claims in its summaries (at paragraphs 7,46,59.3 and 132.2), it is as if Mr. Shimshon conducted due diligence, after which he invested in the purchase of shares of Super-Stock himself, which is a long way off.
- As for the correspondence (Appendix 10 to Mr. Shimshon's affidavit in the franchise claim), they also do not prove that Mr. Shimshon conducted a due diligence for a super-stock company. They contain a preliminary requirement for documents for the purpose of due diligence, dated January 31,2017 (ibid., at page 370), which came out of the Doron Ariel Law Firm (to whom Mr. Shimshon referred Michael and his partners) to Adv. Eyal Shweika. In this application, the Ariel Law Firm proposes that it conduct the due diligence for Michael and his partners (H.H. Rafi Ben Ami and Ofer Ben Shushan) through the BDO accounting firm. This letter was sent to Mr. Shimshon only in copy.
It should also be noted that the correspondence also contains a proposal to carry out due diligence work (in the matter of Super Stock Networks Ltd. and H.I.S.A. Import and Trade Ltd.) by BDO CPA firm, which was sent to Hodaya Holdings on February 13,2017 (Appendix 10 aforesaid, pp. 378-380). The rest of the correspondence that was attached to the appendices of Mr. Shimshon's affidavit in the franchise claim also deal with the transfer of materials to the BDO accounting firm for the purpose of due diligence. All of these do not establish that such a thing was actually done, but only the preparation of the ground for its execution.