Civil Case (Center) 11150-09-23 Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd. v. Brook Aviation Ltd.

Judgment

A financial claim filed by the plaintiff, Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd.  (hereinafter: "the plaintiff" or "IAI") against Brook Aviation Ltd.  (hereinafter: "the defendant" or "Brook") in the amount of approximately ILS 2.9 million, and a counterclaim in the amount of approximately ILS 4.4 million, filed by Brook against IAI, due to a dispute that arose between them regarding the implementation and execution of an agreement for the provision of parking and maintenance services for helicopters, which was entered into between them.

Background to the Claim

1. Civil Appeal is a government security company. Among its other areas of activity, it serves as a testing institute that provides maintenance and parking services for helicopters.
2. Brook is a private company. During the period relevant to the lawsuit, Brook began to serve as an air operator for the transportation of public and commercial customers by helicopter.  Gil Peleg is the owner of Brook and serves as its sole director and CEO (hereinafter: "Gil").
3. The lawsuit deals with alleged financial debts owed to Rock in a civil appeal by virtue of an agreement for the provision of parking and maintenance services for helicopters, which was entered into between the parties on June 14,2000 (hereinafter: the "Agreement") (Appendix 2 to the statement of claim).
4. The background to the signing of the agreement is a tender published by the Ministry of Defense, which deals with the transportation of Air Force personnel and the defense establishment to bases far from the center of the country, in which Brook participated (hereinafter: the "Tender").
5. In order to carry out the maintenance work, a civil appeal was required to undergo a certain qualification period - a period known as NRE (Non-Recurring Expenses) (hereinafter: the "NRE Period"), in accordance with the instructions and requirements of the Civil Aviation Authority (hereinafter: "IATA"). Among the other actions required for a civil appeal officer during the NRE period were the training of civil appeal staff to carry out work and repairs to the type of helicopter he would choose, in accordance with the requirements of the Civil Appeals Authority.
6. Appendix D to the agreement stipulated that Brook would pay thecivil appeal the expenses during the NRE period. The agreement anchored the principle of time and trial, according to which a civil appeal would provide the required service and materials, and Brook would pay for the work hours (a minimum of 8 hours of maintenance work per flight) and for the purchase of the materials.
7. It was also stipulated in Appendix D to the agreement that for parking a single helicopter, Brook would pay a fixed monthly sum of $8,500 in the sum of US$8,500 for parking a single helicopter.
8. On December 28,2001, about a year and a half after the signing of the agreement, Brook received a notice from the Ministry of Defense stating that she had won the tender.
9. After winning the tender, the construction of Brook's helicopter project began, in the framework of which, and in accordance with the agreement, construction of the Civil Appeal Tribunal's qualification to carry out maintenance work for the Sikorsky 76 S helicopters (hereinafter: "the Sikorsky Helicopter"), which is the helicopter model selected by Brook, began.
10. During the month of April 2022, Brook's first helicopter arrived, and during the month of July 2022, the second helicopter arrived.
11. During the months of January-September 2022, a civil appeal was required to undergo a qualification period (the NRE period), in accordance with the IAA's guidelines. During this period, the civil appeal provided the defendant with maintenance services, parking services for its helicopters, which included fuel costs, and an office.
12. On November 29,2022, a civil appeal issued an invoice to the defendant for the parking services provided during the NRE period, which include the cost of materials and an office in the sum of ILS 332,698 (Appendix 4 to the statement of claim).
13. After deliberations between the parties, and in accordance with the agreement reached between them on January 19,2023, a civil appeal produced an additional invoice for the NRE period in the sum of ₪189,000 (excluding VAT) (a total of ILS 747,420 including VAT), which Brook was supposed to pay in six installments (Appendix 5 to the statement of claim).
14. According to IAI, Brook did not pay its debts in full for the NRE period and remained indebted for this period in the sum of ILS 554,668.
15. The Ottoman Settlement [Old Version] 1916During the months of October 2022 to June 2023, a civil appeal continued to provide Brock with parking and maintenance services for helicopters, both in connection with its activity with the Ministry of Defense and in connection with its activity with Magen David Adom (hereinafter: "MDA"), following Brock's winning of a tender published by MDA for the evacuation of the wounded 24/7 from two locations, in the north of the country (Poriya airstrip) and in the south of the country (the Hatzerim base).
16. 12-34-56-78 Chekhov v. State of Israel, P.D. 51 (2)As of February 2023, a civil appeal required Brook to comply with a new outline, according to which a fixed monthly sum of $74,855 (about $75,000) would be paid for the ongoing maintenance work, in addition to paying for parking and materials.
17. According to IAI, even for this period, Brook did not pay its debts in full, so that out of the cumulative sum of ILS 2,828,065 due in a civil appeal for this period, Brook paid only ILS 485,367 (for the months of October-November 2022).
18. On June 11,2023, three days before the formal termination of the agreement, Brook unilaterally left IAI's premises, and the agreement came to an end.
19. Since Brook did not pay its alleged debts to IAI, she filed a civil appeal against the claim before me, in which she petitioned to charge Brook in the sum of ILS 2,897,365 (nominal).
20. Brook filed a statement of defense in which she denied IAI's claims. In addition, Brook filed a counterclaim in the amount of ILS 4,336,747 in which she claimed overpayments she had paid to IAI, funding foreign technicians and experts, making various investments on Brook's part that went down the drain, according to her, due to IAI, and preventing the use of thecivil appeal airstrip at Ben Gurion Airport.
21. The parties conducted, on my recommendation, a mediation proceeding, but they were unable to reach an agreement.
22. When the mediation process between the parties was unsuccessful, the proceeding continued as usual, during which four evidentiary hearings were held, in which the witnesses of the parties were examined.

The parties' arguments