Moot Court Competition 2023

Reut School, Jerusalem

Boaz Weinreb, Nir Gil, Yaniv Zarovsky
As the transportation industry evolves, new players are entering the market with innovative solutions.
One such company is ITAXI, which is seeking to disrupt the traditional taxi industry by offering rides at
discounted rates. However, there has been some pushback from taxi drivers who fear that their
livelihoods will be threatened by this new competitor.

Our opinion on this matter is that ITAXI has the potential to benefit both taxi drivers and the general
public. Specifically, we believe that ITAXI could provide scholarships to taxi drivers, allowing them to
study and learn another profession while still earning a living. This would not only give drivers new
career opportunities, but it would also ensure that citizens who previously could not afford taxi rides can
now access them at lower rates. Additionally, those with more financial resources would be able to save
money on their rides. Overall, we believe that ITAXI should be allowed to enter the market and bring
these benefits to both drivers and passengers. Our opinion is that ITAXI should be allowed to enter the
city and operate alongside traditional taxi services. This is because ITAXI provides several benefits to
both drivers and passengers, ultimately improving the transportation industry as a whole.
Firstly, ITAXI provides a more affordable transportation option for passengers. According to a study by
the National Bureau of Economic Research (2016)[1], ride-sharing services like ITAXI are generally less
expensive than traditional taxi services, saving passengers money on their transportation costs. This can
be especially helpful for low-income individuals who may struggle to afford traditional taxi services.
Secondly, ITAXI provides more job opportunities for drivers. While some taxi drivers may feel
threatened by the emergence of ITAXI, the company's offer of scholarships for drivers to learn other
trades or professions means that they can continue to earn a living even if they decide not to drive for
ITAXI. In fact, a study by Oxford University (2017)[2] found that the emergence of ride-sharing services
like ITAXI has led to an increase in job opportunities and income for drivers.
Lastly, allowing ITAXI to enter the city would promote healthy competition in the transportation
industry, which can ultimately benefit consumers. When there are more options available, companies
are forced to provide better services and more affordable prices in order to remain competitive. This can
lead to an overall improvement in the quality of transportation services in the city.

“Rabbi Yehuda says…” [S1]

- Our opinion is that the scenario of itaxi differs from the situation described in the source because itaxi
offers a solution that benefits both the taxi drivers and the consumers. By offering a stipend for studies
to the taxi drivers, itaxi helps them to transition to another profession and maintain their livelihood,
while at the same time, providing affordable taxi services to the citizens who cannot afford regular taxi
fares.
Moreover, itaxi's approach does not necessarily lower the market rate of taxi services, but rather
provides an alternative service with a different pricing structure. This competition in the market can
actually benefit the consumers by encouraging other taxi companies to lower their prices or improve
their services in order to remain competitive.
Another important aspect of itaxi's approach is the social impact it can have on the community. By
providing affordable transportation, itaxi can improve the quality of life of citizens who previously
could not access reliable transportation, such as low-income families, senior citizens, and people with
disabilities. This can lead to increased mobility, access to healthcare, education, and job opportunities,
which can ultimately contribute to the economic development of the community.
In addition, itaxi's approach can also contribute to reducing traffic congestion and pollution by
encouraging people to use shared transportation instead of driving their own cars. This can have a
positive impact on the environment and public health.
Overall, while the source suggests that lowering prices can have a negative impact on the market rate,
itaxi's approach demonstrates that providing affordable services can have a positive impact on both the
consumers and the community. Itaxi's innovative solution provides a win-win situation for all parties
involved, and can serve as a model for other companies looking to make a positive social impact while
also achieving business success.
“Machine matzah can be traced back…” [s2]
- Our opinion is that Rabbi Shaul Nathanzon's argument against Rabbi Kluger's objection to machine
matzah is more convincing. While Rabbi Kluger's argument is based on the Talmudic passage, it is
important to consider the context in which it was written. In that time, poor laborers were often taken
advantage of and did not have many options for employment. However, in today's society, there are
other job opportunities available for taxi drivers who may be affected by the introduction of ITAXI.

Moreover, it is crucial to consider the economic benefits that machine matzah can bring. Machine
matzah can produce matzah more efficiently, which can lead to lower prices for consumers. It can also
provide more jobs in the manufacturing industry, which can benefit the economy as a whole.
Additionally, Rabbi Nathanzon's argument regarding the printing press raises an important point. If we
were to follow Rabbi Kluger's reasoning, we would have to prohibit the use of many modern
technologies that have replaced traditional jobs. This would be impractical and would limit progress and
innovation.
In conclusion, while it is important to consider the impact of technological advances on the community,
we believe that the economic benefits and progress that machine matzah can bring outweigh the
concerns raised by Rabbi Kluger's argument.

“Arukh HaShulhan, Hoshen Mishpat

Now in our country…” [S3]
The source cited concerns about the negative impact on the market when prices are lowered excessively.
However, the case of ITAXI's entry into the market is different. ITAXI is not reducing the prices of
taxis, but rather, it is creating a more competitive market where taxi drivers have access to additional
income opportunities through scholarships for professional training. This will not only benefit the taxi
drivers but also the citizens who previously could not afford taxi services. In fact, according to a study
conducted by the National Bureau of Economic Research (2016)[1], increased competition in the taxi
industry can lead to lower prices and improved service quality for consumers.
Moreover, ITAXI's entry into the market could lead to an increase in employment opportunities, as the
company will likely need to hire additional staff to manage operations and training programs. This can
have a positive impact on the local economy by increasing spending power and reducing unemployment
rates.
In addition, ITAXI's innovative approach to the taxi industry could attract more tourism to the area,
leading to increased revenue for local businesses. According to a study by Oxford Economics, every $1
spent on travel and tourism generates $2.50 in economic activity.
Overall, the entry of ITAXI into the town has the potential to benefit the economy by creating a more
competitive market, providing additional income opportunities, increasing employment, and attracting
more tourism. Thus, we believe that allowing ITAXI to enter the market would be a positive decision for
the town.
“Talmud Bavli,
Bava Batra 21b
Rav Huna said…” [S4]
While the Talmudic passage may have been relevant in a time when businesses were localized and
limited in reach, it may not be applicable in today's globalized economy. ITAXI is a technology-based
service that can provide transportation services to anyone with a smartphone, regardless of their physical
location. Therefore, it is unlikely that ITAXI's entry into the town will disrupt the livelihoods of local
taxi drivers, as they will continue to serve their regular customer base.
Furthermore, the entry of ITAXI can actually stimulate economic growth and benefit the local
community in various ways. Firstly, it can create new job opportunities for drivers who may have been
previously unemployed or underemployed. Secondly, it can attract more tourists to the town, increasing
revenue for local businesses such as restaurants, shops, and hotels. Thirdly, ITAXI's competitive pricing
model can provide affordable transportation options for citizens who may have previously been unable
to use traditional taxi services due to cost.
According to a study conducted by the National Bureau of Economic Research (2016) [1], the entry of ride-
sharing services such as ITAXI into cities has led to an increase in employment and a decrease in traffic
congestion. The study also found that the entry of ride-sharing services did not lead to a decline in
earnings for traditional taxi drivers.
In conclusion, while the Talmudic passage may have been relevant in its time, it may not be applicable
to the current economic landscape. The entry of ITAXI into the town can bring about numerous benefits
for the local community, including the creation of new job opportunities, increased revenue for local
businesses, and affordable transportation options for citizens.
“Talmud Bavli, Makkot 24a
King David came and synthesized…” [S5]
Based on the source , it is clear that the livelihood of individuals is important and should be protected.
This is demonstrated through the example of King David and the Nob priests, where the loss of
livelihood is equated to taking a life. This principle can also be applied to the case of the taxi drivers in
the town.
If ITAXI were to enter the town and disrupt the livelihoods of existing taxi drivers, it would be akin to
taking away their means of survival. It is essential to consider the impact of such actions on the drivers
and their families. Therefore, if ITAXI wants to operate in the town, they must ensure that the existing
drivers' livelihoods are not adversely affected.
Moreover, it is possible for ITAXI to provide alternative means of livelihood for the drivers. As
suggested in our previous opinion, ITAXI could offer scholarships for the drivers to learn another
profession and earn a living from it. This would not only support the livelihood of the drivers but also
provide them with opportunities for personal and professional growth.
Overall, the source emphasizes the importance of protecting individuals' livelihoods, and we believe that
this principle should be applied to the situation with ITAXI and the existing taxi drivers in the town.

“The matter at hand was a controversy…” [S6]

The source above discusses a case in which a wealthy printer tried to harm the business of a scholar by
selling his own version of a text at a much lower price, causing the scholar's edition to lose sales. The
Rema ruled in favor of the scholar, noting that such behavior is prohibited in Jewish law.
While some may argue that this ruling should apply to the case of ITAXI entering a town and potentially
hurting the livelihood of taxi drivers, we believe that this claim is not true. There are several reasons for
this.
Firstly, the situations are not identical. In the case discussed in the source, one individual was
deliberately undercutting another's business in order to harm them. However, the entry of ITAXI into a
town is not an intentional attack on taxi drivers. ITAXI is simply offering a different service that some
people may prefer.
Secondly, the market for transportation services is not a zero-sum game. Just because ITAXI enters a
town does not necessarily mean that taxi drivers will automatically lose business. People have different
preferences and may choose to use taxis instead of ITAXI for a variety of reasons, such as supporting
local businesses or because they prefer the familiarity of a taxi.
Furthermore, competition can actually benefit consumers by driving down prices and improving the
quality of services offered. By introducing competition, ITAXI may force taxi drivers to improve their
own services in order to remain competitive, ultimately benefiting consumers.
Additionally, There have been numerous instances where new technologies have been introduced, and
the existing market has had time to adapt. For instance, when smartphones became widely available,
many people still preferred to use regular cell phones, and it took years for the smartphone market to
become dominant. Similarly, when streaming services like Netflix became popular, there were still
many people who preferred to use DVDs, and it took time for the market to shift towards streaming.
These examples show that when a new technology is introduced, the existing market still has time to
adapt and transition towards the new technology. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that even if
ITAXI were to enter a town, taxi drivers would have time to adapt to the change, and some people would
still prefer to use regular taxis for various reasons.

In conclusion, while there may be concerns about the impact of ITAXI on the livelihoods of traditional
taxi drivers, we believe that there is no reason to prohibit ITAXI from entering the city. The benefits of
increased transportation options and competition outweigh the potential negative effects. Furthermore, it
is important to consider the impact of technological advancements on industries and to adapt
accordingly. Rather than resisting change, we should embrace innovation and find ways to ensure a fair
and equitable transition for all parties involved.

Sources from the Book:

[S1]

“Rabbi Yehudah says: A shopkeeper may not

hand out toasted seeds and nuts to children,

since this accustoms them to come to their

store [at the expense of competing shops]. The

Sages permit this.

[Rabbi Yehudah says] nor may one sell below

the market price. The Sages say: One who does

should be remembered favorably.

Nor may one sell below the market price.

The Sages say: One who does should be

remembered favorably.”

What is the reason of the Sages? Because this

lowers the market rate.”

[S2]

“Machine matzah can be traced back to a French inventor named Isaac Singer, who developed a

machine that rolled and flattened dough. In 1838, he presented the machine to a group of rabbis and

received their approval. Soon thereafter, this machine spread to other Jewish communities in Germany,

Poland, and throughout Europe.

However, controversy erupted in the late 1850s around the cities of Lvov, Cracow, and Brody. In 1859,

Rabbi Shlomo Kluger (1785-1869), the rabbi of Brody, helped publish a pamphlet called “A Warning

to the Jewish People.” This document compiled various rabbinic arguments against using machine

matzah. The same year, Rabbi Yosef Shaul Nathanson (1808–1875), a leading rabbinic authority in Lvov,

published a pamphlet in response called “Nullifying the Warning.” In that work, Rabbi Nathanson and

other rabbis harshly criticized the argument in the former pamphlet.

Some of the arguments cited for and against machine matzah dealt with halakhic details related to

matzah in particular. For example, matzah is supposed to be baked ‫( לשמה‬lishmah, with dedicated

intention)—can a machine have this special level of intent? Other arguments related to the intricacies

of the machine, and whether machine matzah would be more or less likely to contain hametz (leaven)

than handmade matzah.

However, other arguments in this debate were grounded in social and economic understandings of how

machine matzah would impact the broader community. These arguments relate most directly to the

circumstances of our case.

The first argument that Rabbi Kluger cites against the use of machine matzah

relates to the impact it would have on poor laborers whose jobs would be

replaced by the matzah machines. His argument is based on the following

passage from the Talmud, pertaining to the reading of Megillat Esther (the Book

of Esther) on the holiday of Purim.

“Nullifying the Warning,” Rabbi Yosef

Shaul Nathanson (1859)

, what was written in the printed

pamphlet, his first and foremost reason,

that just as the Megillah is not read on

Shabbat, even though this is obligatory,

because the eyes of the poor are raised at

the reading of the Megillah, here, too, they

would negate the machine because of the

eyes of the poor, for from this they have

maot hittim... This is hot air.

This brought us to laughter, for there, since

are reading the Megillah, and the

main purpose of the Megillah is to remind

people to give gifts to the poor, it is not

proper that they read it (on Shabbat) but

not observe what is written in it. [...]

Here, however, the main thing is to bake

matzot in order to fulfill the obligation of

[eating] matzah, and how does this pertain

to the poor? And if one’s household is

numerous, does it become forbidden for a

person to bake matzot and hire the poor to

help?

“Nullifying the Warning,”

Rabbi Eliezer Horowitz (1859)

I greatly wonder regarding his [Rabbi Kluger’s] reason

that the eyes of the poor are turned to this. Why

should we not forbid the newly invented machine for

the printing of sacred books, as a result of which many

workers have been put out of work? And perhaps he,

too, erred in this, and printed his book on the machine,

which is a “twisted thing that cannot be made straight”

[Kohelet 1:15]. If he is one of those who enacts

preventive measures, then that machine should also be

prohibited in accordance with his reasoning, but his

reasoning would be the subject of derision, scorn, and a

laughingstock.

- Rabbi Kluger's argument is that just as because after reading the Megillat Esther one should give charity, that is why it is
forbidden to read the Megillah on Shabbat, because it is forbidden to touch money on Shabbat. Therefore, when you use machine
matzoh, you give "charity" and therefore when you use machine matzoh, you do not give "charity" to the poor, so it is forbidden.

On the other hand, Rabbi Shaul Nathanzon says that the mere use of a printing press to print the "Warning" by Rabbi Kluger
caused the dismissal of many people whose occupation was to write books and according to his method, the very printing of the
"Warning" is prohibited.”

[S3]

“Arukh HaShulhan, Hoshen Mishpat

Now in our country, we must reprimand the shopkeepers who sell products low prices, and as a result cause great harm to the
market, and poverty. The Sages permitted businesses to earn a profit of one-sixth even when it comes to selling products essential
to life, and certainly when it comes to other products one can profit much more. But now people are lowering prices thoughtlessly
and without reason.”

[S4]

“Talmud Bavli,

Bava Batra 21b

Rav Huna said: There was a certain resident

of an alleyway who set up a mill. Another

resident of the alleyway came and set up a mill

nextdoor. The rule is that the first one may

prevent the second from doing so, by saying:

You are disrupting my livelihood…

Let us say the following ruling supports Rav

Huna: One must distance fish traps from other

fish traps, as far as the fish travel. And how

much? Rabba bar Rav Huna says: Up to a

parsa.

(The gemara then rejects this comparison to

Rav Huna’s ruling:) Perhaps fish are different,

as they look around (and then follow the food

into the trap). ”

[S5]

“Talmud Bavli, Makkot 24a

King David came and synthesized (the Torah into) eleven commandments, as it is written: “A Psalm of David. God, who shall live
in Your Tent? Who shall dwell on Your sacred mountain? (1) One who walks wholeheartedly, and (2) works righteousness, and (3)
speaks truth in their heart. (4) Who has no slander upon their tongue, (5) nor does evil to their neighbor…” (Psalms 15:1) “Nor does
evil to their neighbor” – this line is referring to one who does not infringe upon another’s business.”

[S6]

“The matter at hand was a controversy surrounding publishing rights. Rabbi Meir of Padua had taken tremendous effort to publish
a corrected version of the Rambam's Mishneh Torah. Since Rabbi Meir did not own a printing press, he partnered with a Venetian
printer named Aloizi Brogodin. However, this angered a rival printer named Marcos Ostinian, who wanted Rabbi Meir's business.
Ostinian was a wealthy aristocrat and retaliated by publishing his own version of the Mishneh Torah. To make matters worse, he
sold it at a much reduced price, too hurt the sales of Rabbi Meir's edition. Since he was wealthy, Ostinian was able to accept this
loss in order to settle the score. Rabbi Meir brought his case to the Rema, asking him to prohibit anyone in the Jewish community
from purchasing Ostinian's edition. The Rema ruled in favor of Rabbi Meir, noting the passage from the Mordekhai above in his
first argument. source: Responsa of Rhema #10 If so, [that in the case of the dead-end, one cannot establish a new business in front
of the existing one] then our case is also one of "guaranteed damage," since the second publisher was able to set a lower price than
the scholar [Rabbi Meir]. And who would see this and don't want to buy the cheaper one one? He was able to do this [offer such a
low price] because he is one of the richest people in the country. Therefore, also in our case the halakhah follows Rav Huna.”

External Sources:

[1]
J. Cramer & AB Krueger, 3/2016, “Disruptive Change in the Taxi Business: The Case of Uber”
https://www.nber.org/papers/w30612
[2]
Anonymous, 26/1/2017, “New research shows Uber has led to a 10 per cent drop in wages for traditional taxi drivers, but overall
driver numbers have boomed”
https://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/news/201701-uber-drivers/

Forbes, "Uber's $8.1 Billion Net Loss: A 'Normalization' Or A 'Gigantic Failure'?" by Sergei Klebnikov
CNBC, "Why Uber and Lyft riders are more likely to get into accidents, especially on weekends," by Lora Kolodny

Wired, "London taxi drivers just won a major legal victory against Uber," by Matt Burgess

The New York Times, "The Great Taxi Wars of China," by Li Yuan

The Wall Street Journal, "Grab’s Latest Funding Round Lifts Valuation to $10 Billion," by P.R. Venkat and Newley Purnell

Business Insider, "Lyft's 2020 guidance was slightly better than feared, but the stock is still tanking," by Carmen Reinicke

The Guardian, "Uber drivers stage protests in London and other UK cities," by Rebecca Smithers