page 524 note 1 See Israel Electric Co. Ltd. v. Ha'aretz Ltd. in “A Digest of Recent Israeli Cases” (1979) 14 Is. L.R. 382.

page 524 note 2 Mizrachi v. Ha'aretz decided by the Jerusalem District Court in June 1979.

page 524 note 3 19 L.S.I. 254.

page 525 note 4 21 L.S.I. 133.

page 526 note 5 It is interesting to note that as originally enacted in 1965, sec. 21 authorized the courts to prohibit publication of criminal informations. In 1967, however, the section was amended so as, inter alia, to remove the authority to prohibit the publication of a criminal information. Thus, as to criminal informations, the recent amendment restores the subsection to its original 1965 position.

page 526 note 1 Laws of Palestine Chap. 16.

page 526 note 2 (1962) (IV) 16 P.D. 2407.

page 527 note 3 First applied in the landmark decision Kol Ha-Am Ltd. v. The Minister of the Interior (1953) (II) 7 P.E. 422.

page 529 note 1 This is an over-simplified view in most cases. Not only are shares often divided into different classes with different rights and, consequently, different values, but the shares of a corporation whose stock is not regularly traded, generally have no market value. In such a situation a seller who cannot offer enough shares to give some measure of control in the corporation, will generally not be able to find a buyer at all or, alternately, will be forced to sell his shares at far below their real value.

page 529 note 2 Gower, L.C.B., The Principles of Modern Company Law (London, Stevens and Sons, 3rd ed., 1969) 110.Google Scholar

page 531 note 3 Ibid.

page 531 note 4 The Israeli Companies Ordinance is essentially a copy of the British Companies Act of 1929, and in the vast areas of company law not covered, or covered inadequately, by the Ordinance, Israeli courts have generally followed English precedents.