In this context, Dr. Mofkadi noted that "it was not possible to rule out the scenario that the branch would find it difficult to assume profits in the coming years as well, despite the aggressive marketing and branding moves taken by the shareholders. Assuming zero profitability from 2019 onwards, and until the shareholders decide to close the branch at the end of the lease period, the current value of the loss of income will be accordingly higher. Such a scenario is extremely conservative, since it does not take into account future losses" (p. 25 of the opinion). Hence, assuming a significant profitability of the branch throughout the period is indeed conservative and in favor of the counter-defendants.
I do not believe that there is room to reduce the compensation that Dr. Mofkadi received for the Bat Yam branch.
- I therefore determine that the counter-plaintiffs were able to establish entitlement to compensation in the amount of ILS 3,676,424 as of April 30,2018. The sum will bear shekel interest in accordance with the law from April 30,2018 until the date of repayment (30 days from the date of this judgment, days of recess). In the event that the amount is not paid by the repayment date, shekel interest and arrears fees will be added to the current fund, from the date of repayment until the actual date of payment, in accordance with the provisions of the Interest Rulings and Linkage Law, 5721-1961, including sections 5 and 5A
Additional Damage Components
- After perusal, I do not believe that the counter-plaintiffs have succeeded in establishing additional heads of damages claimed by them.
- Thus, they claim to be entitled to compensation for the violation of their right of precedence to establish additional branches in Sderot and Bat Yam, but they have not proven the extent of the damage caused to them as a result of this, according to them, and the matter is not addressed in the expert opinion on their behalf.
Another head of compensation relates to the expenses of the new branding that the counter-plaintiffs were forced to incur. Appendix 22 to Mr. Shimshon's affidavit in the franchisees' claim includes "a copy of various documents, invoices and correspondence in connection with the branding of 'Big Stock'". These are about 100 pages of appendices that include various invoices, price quotes, fuel expenses and so on. However, this component of the damage is not quantified in the affidavit. Instead, we find a reference to Dr. Mofkadi's opinion, but it does not include a reference to this component.