Despite this, the municipality chose to continue its misleading conduct while concealing this vital information.
Termination of Engagement
- As stated above, on January 13,2021, the company was exposed to an email sent by Adv. Einat Yirmiyahu from the Ministry of Interior's legal office to the municipality on January 10,2021 (P/35), which clearly indicates that for years the municipality knew very well that the transaction would not be approved by the Minister of the Interior and/or should have known, but nevertheless presented the company with a false representation that the transaction would be approved by the Minister of the Interior after the change in the zoning plan, while holding the company's funds, all while the company relies on this representation, extends the validity of the agreement with the municipality, undertakes to pay the municipality additional funds, and invests considerable resources to carry out the project.
Due to the importance of the matter, the following is the full text of the email message sent by Adv. Yirmiyahu from the Ministry of Interior's Legal Office to the Municipality on January 10,2021:
"Hannah, good evening,
After receiving the addendum to the agreement with V Equity from June 2017, which was first sent to me on December 30,2020, I do not understand on what basis the municipality signed an addendum to the agreement with the company, after the Ministry of Interior did not approve the engagement with the company in the framework of the tender, as stated in Ms. Ravit Klappner's letter dated November 2,2016!
Criminal Appeal Whereas No. 4 of the Addendum to this Agreement, the Developer has paid the sum of ILS 5,000,000 up to this date (June 2017)!
The agreement was not approved by the Ministry of Interior at the end of 2016. Why did the municipality choose to hold it with the company and collect money from it? [Emphasis in original]
Contrary to the interpretation of the Municipality, as stated in the response to the petition filed against it by the company, which held that "in the framework of the Ministry of Interior's response of November 2,2016, it was explicitly clarified that the Ministry of the Interior denies the granting of the approval due to the non-fulfillment of the conditions of the second suspension (changes in the designation of the land), and therefore it was understood that an additional application can be made only after the completion of the additional suspension condition, the condition for completing the change of zoning (on the land)", the criminal appeal stated in the Ministry of Interior's letter of November 2,2016 - "In light of the aforesaid, since the approved plan designated Area 63 for an education campus, I find that the agreement does not correspond to the permissible purposes of criminal appeal of the valid planning situation. In light of this, it is not possible to approve the aforementioned agreement" - it is not at all understandable that the Ministry of Interior will approve the application after the designation change!