Search by Practice
Latest Updates / Commercial Litigation
June 8, 2017
Barnea & Co. represents Zeev Rom
The Haifa District Court ruled that Gad Zeevi would have to pay businessman Zeev Rom USD 1.5 million in brokerage fees in respect of a deal in which Zeevi acquired 20% of Bezeq in 2000. Adv. Zohar Landa and Adv. Moran Bickel from the litigation department at Barnea, represented Zeev Rom.
March 27, 2017
Nespresso Loses Court Battle with Espresso Club
The Israeli District Court of Tel Aviv ruled against global food giant, Nestle, and its subsidiary Nespresso in a claim filed by them in Israel against Espresso Club, an Israeli company, on the grounds of alleged copyright infringement, trademark violations, unfair competition and damage to Nespresso's reputation.
March 5, 2017
Nespresso Loses Suit Filed against Israeli Company, Espresso Club
The Tel Aviv District Court rejected the lawsuit filed by Nespresso and the global food company, Nestle, against the Israeli company, Espresso Club. Nespresso claimed that Espresso Club’s advertisement, which uses a look-alike of George Clooney, violates the intellectual property of Nespresso and constitutes unfair competition. The Court rejected Nespresso's claims and ordered it to pay Espresso Club NIS 110,070 in legal costs. Espresso Club was represented by Adv. Zohar Lande, Adv. Itay Hatam and Adv. Gili Cohen-Arazi from Barnea
October 14, 2016
After 9 Years of Litigation, David's Geller Claim Against Yitzchak Omer, Who Was Represented by Barnea & Co., Was Dismissed.
As previously published, Geller had filed a lawsuit alleging fraud in the amount of nearly NIS 70 million. Even though the main claim for fraud was dismissed, the District Court obliged Omer to pay millions of NIS to Geller deciding that they were granted to Omer as a loan.
Geller and Omer both appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court denied Geller's appeal entirely, accepted Omer's appeal and returned the case to the District Court.
This week, the District Court dismissed the action entirely and accepted Omer's argument that the funds were transferred to him as part of a share purchase transaction. The Court ruled that under these circumstances, Omer does not need to reimburse the funds or to transfer any shares.