In light of all the above, I do not believe that there is a difference between the area of the apartments specified in the Pinui-Binui agreement and their area in accordance with the permit in order to establish for the defendants reasonable grounds for refusal of the project.
- With regard to the addition in respect of the rights, the defendants further claim that prior to the signing of the Pinui-Binui agreement, their apartments had unrealized building rights, in light of which there was room to increase the area of their original apartments and, accordingly, the area of their consideration apartments as well. Thus, according to the defendants, each of their apartments had rights to an expansion of 25-26 square meters, that this area should be multiplied by an equivalent coefficient of 0.44, and that accordingly their consideration apartments should be added - only for this component another 11 square meters. According to the defendants, since, according to the agreement, the gap between the consideration for the small apartments and the large apartments is 6 square meters, an additional 5 square meters should be added to them for this component.
Before examining the arguments, I find it necessary to set the record straight - the original area of the large and small apartments - as determined by the court's expert and is not in dispute between the parties - is 96.3 square meters for the large apartments and 68 square meters for the small apartments. The area of the consideration apartments is: 98 square meters for the large apartments and 78 square meters for the large apartments. From the aforesaid, it appears that the large apartments receive an additional area of 1.7 square meters and the small apartments receive an additional area of 10 square meters. From the aforesaid, it appears that the difference in consideration between the large and small apartments is 8.3 square meters - an area that embodies the excess consideration for building rights that are not realized for the small apartments. Therefore, in any event, even to the extent that the coefficient claimed by the defendants is applied (taking into account that their first claim regarding their entitlement to additional areas due to the differences in the area registered in the Pinui-Binui agreement is rejected), it is not a difference of 5 square meters, but at most a difference of 2.7 square meters and a coefficient of 0.33 instead of a coefficient of 0.44. The question that is asked is whether the defendants were deprived in the valuation of the unused building rights that their apartments had prior to the Pinui-Binui agreement, when the supplement granted to them in the framework of the considerations of this agreement is based on the assumption of the valuation of these rights by multiplying by a coefficient of 0.33. I am of the opinion that this question should be answered in the negative.