In my opinion, this should be done with respect to the Bat Yam branch for the reasons presented above. Where there is difficulty in relying on the true data, there is no choice but to rely on hypothetical calculations, provided that they rise to a reasonable basis for awarding compensation, in accordance with the required balance of probabilities.
- A perusal of the calculation made by the expert, Dr. Mofkadi, shows that it can be adopted for the purpose of awarding compensation at the Bat Yam branch. I did not find it necessary to detract from it, nor did I take into account the objections raised by the counter-defendants:
- In fact, the main objection raised by them was the expert's lack of reliance on the facts of the matter. However, this matter does not justify the disqualification of the opinion in relation to the Bat Yam branch for the reasons raised above.
- Another main objection raised by the counter-defendants is that the calculation that was made takes into account 10 years, andthatthis is an excessive and unfounded period. However, the argument should be rejected in view of the concrete relationship at hand. As we have seen, at the outset, Max Stock tried to limit the franchise period to 10 years (five years with the possibility of an extension for an additional five years (see above in paragraph 51)). However, this option was rejected by the franchisees, in the expectation that the franchise period would be longer. Indeed, Max agreed to enter into a franchise agreement according to which the grounds for its cancellation would be limited. Hence, it also anticipated that the period of the concession would exceed ten years, unless grounds arose for its cancellation.
Such agreements must also be respected in the context of a franchise relationship. As was ruled in the Bloom case, where it was attributed decisive significance that the parties to the agreement found to allow the grantor of the franchise to cancel it, subject to a list of grounds for cancellation. Admittedly, even in such a case, there is no guarantee that the agreement will last forever (see above, the discussion held on this matter in paragraph 58 above); Still, the expectation that the period of the agreement before us will be very long is certainly reasonable, taking into account the negotiations that took place between the parties.