The Supreme Court ruled that the agreement is a closed agreement and there is no place to oblige or prevent the shareholders from performing any actions. A relational contract is a contract that is formulated in general terms only and in which the parties agree on a common goal but were unable, unwilling or unable to determine precise steps to achieve the said goal. Generally, these are long-term agreements, which make it difficult for the parties to set deadlines over time. However, not every long-term agreement is a relational contract and there are long-term agreements that are closed, detailed and interpretive agreements, reflecting the give and take of the transaction and there is no place to interfere with them. Here, the rights holders signed a variety of agreements, detailed and precise, which define all of their rights and obligations in their relationship with the hotel owners. The arrangements set forth in the agreements are detailed and explicit, and no substantial amendment or change can be imposed on them, as this would constitute improper interference in the commercial negotiations that led to the transaction. In light of the foregoing, the arrangements that appear in the existing agreements must be adhered to, according to which the rights holders cannot oblige the hotel owners to appoint a management company or deviate from the agreements that allow the hotel owner to update the cost of the management fees.
