Drumhead Court-Martial: The Supreme Court serves Discount Investment Company

1. 1A matter of timing: The Supreme Court ruling comes in at just the right time for Discount Investment Company
   “Does the Company have independent standing in the handling of the derivative claim?” To this question, the Supreme Court replies: “My answer to this is yes. This result is requested in light of the fact that the Company continues to act as a separate legal entity, even after the approval of the petition for a derivative claim”. The ruling was provided last week. Africa Israel, by counsel Adv. Boaz Ben Zur and Dikla Sirkis, claimed that the derivative plaintiff was conducting himself in a manner that indicates a conflict of interest between him and the Company, and therefore the Company must be granted an independent and separate standing. This ruling happened upon the perfect time for Discount Investment Company, which was caught up in a grueling confrontation with the derivative plaintiff’s counsels, Adv. Ronen Adini and Ram Dekel, whose petition for the approval of the claim in the Ma’ariv acquisition transaction was accepted through a poignant decision by Judge Grosskopf.
2. Who is representing?
   0000The decision of Discount Investment Company ‘s Board of Directors to settle with the defendants’ directors caused a great turmoil in Judge Grosskopf’s courtroom, mainly due to the claim made by Adv. Adini and Dekel that the settlement – NIS 100 million to be paid to the Company, mainly through the defendants’ insurance — was plotted behind their backs. Those who sided with the settlement argued that their opposition is driven by fee considerations. Adini and Dekel claimed that the settlement could have been higher and that the lawyer’s fees are at the Judge’s discretion.

Read the full article in Calcalist (Hebrew)