| Acre Magistrate’s Court | |
| Civil Case 16052-06-20 Viper Security Ltd. v. Horfeish Local Council
|
|
| Before | The Honorable Judge Amit Rozins
|
|
|
Plaintiffs |
Viper Security Ltd. By Attorney Talia S. Bader |
|
|
Against
|
||
| Defendants | Hurfeish Local Council
By Attorney Naim N. Bader |
|
Judgment
I have before me a financial claim in the sum of ILS 115,530.
On August 30,2009, the plaintiff and the defendant, the Hurfeish Local Council, entered into an agreement for the provision of guarding and security services (following the winning of the tender) (hereinafter: the "Agreement"), which was extended in an agreement dated September 1,2012.
There is no dispute between the parties as to the scope of the work hours actually performed on behalf of the plaintiff.
The dispute is over the issue of the tariff according to which the defendant should have paid for the services that the plaintiff provided to the defendant in the years 2014 to 2017.
The plaintiff's arguments
- The plaintiff claims that she is entitled to additional payment for the services she provided to the defendant between the years 2014 and 2017, for the differences resulting from the tariff update, on the basis of an extension order to the collective agreement in the guarding and security industry of July 22,2014 (hereinafter: the "expansion order"). According to the plaintiff, the extension order obligated it to increase the wages of its employees, and therefore, the defendant must increase the payments it pays to the plaintiff accordingly.
Therefore, the plaintiff began to submit invoices to the defendant reflecting these costs, beginning in November 2014.
- According to the plaintiff, the actual conduct of the parties formulated an implied contract, which changes the price per hour of work set in the extended agreement of September 1,2012, in which an hourly price of ILS 35.46 was agreed.
The plaintiff wishes to conclude the existence of an implied contract from the fact that the hourly rate set out in the agreement between the parties was actually updated over the years, in accordance with the rate at which the Security Division of the Israel Police's educational institutions updated its rates.
The defendant's implicit agreement to update the tariffs is also reflected in the approval of the updated invoices after 2014 by the defendant's security officer at the time, the late Abdallah Azzam, and their registration in the accounting system, without any reservations.