In the case, it was found that there was a real omission as the franchisee, Mr. Blum, had an independent reputation of his own, in light of the long period of time he operated as a broker in the relevant area.
The Honorable Judge, as he was then called, also noted that the damage caused in such a case "must be assessed in terms of the amount of the difference (the delta) between the profits of the brokerage agency under the umbrella of Anglo-Saxon and the profits of Bloom as an independent broker" (ibid., at paragraph 26). This was not done by the experts who gave an opinion in that case; however, the Honorable Justice Amit noted that a complete denial of compensation would be excessively stringent in the circumstances of the case there. A finding was found by making an estimate based on data provided in the expert opinions submitted there to the District Court's case, and in one of them there was a basis forits execution, even if in a relatively crude manner (ibid., at paragraph 35).
- It can therefore be conceived that when a franchise agreement was unlawfully canceled, and the franchisee continued to operate independently, not under the brand that was deprived of it, the compensation should be examined in accordance with the gap between the projected revenues that would have been received assuming the continuation of the activity, compared to the actual revenues received from the new activity.
Of course, this possibility is not always up for examination. Thus, for example, there may be cases in which the concessionaire will cease its activity, and will not be able to resume it. There may be cases in which the activity that will continue will suffer from external "distortions" that will make it difficult to assess the true data. In these circumstances, reasonable estimates will be sufficed, to the extent that the damage plaintiffs are able to substantiate them.
The method chosen by the expert on behalf of the counter-plaintiffs - Dr. Mofkadi
- The expert on behalf of the counter-plaintiffs estimated the compensation to which they were entitled to ILS 10,149,087, assuming that the concession period was until the end of 2028. Of this amount, the compensation for the activity in the one-day branch was ILS 3,676,424; while the compensation for the activity in the Sderot branch was ILS 6,472,663.
- It should be noted, however, that the expert's opinion was not based on actual actual data after the cancellation of the franchise agreements. Although it examined the activity data of the two branches up to 2017 as a whole, Dr. Mofkadi then chose to present two forecasts, based on predicted scenarios (two predictive vectors, as he put it). One examined the expected profit of the stores, assuming that they would continue to operate under the Max Stock brand; and second, what was the expected profit of the stores without the brand (p. 142, 13-10).
and the point in time at which the assessment should be made was set at April 30,2018; then, in accordance with the expectation following the hearing of the opening stimulus that took place before my colleague, the Honorable Justice Jakoel, the parties were supposed to part with business.