Defamation Claims in Israel: A Legal Guide

A publication that damages a reputation raises one practical question: is there a cause of action, and what is done about it. This guide sets out the four tests the Law applies, what counts as publication, the step that precedes a claim, the defences available to the publisher, and how damages are determined.

By Adv. and Notary Igal Mor

Updated September 2026 · About a 9-minute read

Book a consultation 02-5953322

What counts as defamation, and who can be harmed

Section 1 of the Prohibition of Defamation Law, 5725-1965, does not define defamation by how the person affected felt. It defines it by four tests applied to the content of the publication. One is enough.

A publication liable to humiliate a person in the eyes of others, or to make them an object of hatred, contempt or ridicule.
A publication liable to hold a person up to scorn for acts, conduct or qualities attributed to them.
A publication liable to harm a person in their office, business, occupation or profession, whether the office is public or otherwise.
A publication liable to hold a person up to scorn because of their race, origin, religion, place of residence, age, sex, sexual orientation or disability.

Two points that change the picture

There is no need to prove that harm actually occurred. The test is whether the publication was liable to lead to such a result. A person whose acquaintances did not change their view of them does not lose the cause of action.

"Person" in that section means an individual or a corporation. A company harmed by business criticism may fall within the definition just as an individual does, and that is what makes reviews of businesses the central arena in this field.

What counts as publication

Section 2 of the Law defines publication deliberately broadly: orally or in writing, and including a drawing, image, movement, sound and any other means. A message in a group chat, a review, a video or a post are all publications for the purposes of the Law.

The practical difference lies not in the medium but in the reach. For the civil cause of action it is enough that the matter reached one person other than the person affected, under section 7 of the Law. By contrast, the criminal offence under section 6 requires two cumulative conditions: that the publication reached two or more people, and that it was made with intent to harm.

That is why most matters reaching a law firm are civil, and criminal proceedings are the exception.

The step that precedes a claim, and that most people skip

Section 17 of the Law sets out a rule that is easy to miss: a defendant who is a media outlet, or responsible for one, will not enjoy the good-faith defence if asked to publish a correction or denial and failed to do so in the manner in which the defamation was published and with a similar degree of prominence.

In practical terms, a written demand for a correction is not a courtesy but a legal step. It creates a position in which refusing to correct weakens the publisher's case, and in many instances it resolves the dispute without proceedings at all.

In the other direction, section 19 lists circumstances the court may take into account in the defendant's favour, including publishing an apology or a correction and a willingness to compensate. Here too, conduct after the publication affects the outcome.

Section 25A adds a duty to update: where a publication concerned an investigation or proceedings that ended in the closure of the file or in an acquittal, the earlier publication is to be updated.

The defences available to the publisher

A finding that a publication amounts to defamation is not the end of the road. The Law provides the publisher with two principal defences, and the difference between them is the root of most disputes in these cases.

Truth in publication

Section 14 establishes a defence where the matter published was true and there was public interest in the publication. Both conditions are required together: truth without public interest is not enough, and neither is the reverse. The section adds that the defence will not be denied merely because of an incidental detail that causes no real harm.

Good faith

Section 15 lists twelve circumstances in which a publication made in good faith is protected, among them a legal or moral duty to publish, an expression of opinion about the conduct of the person affected in a public role, a complaint to the competent authority, and criticism of a work the person affected published.

Section 16 sets out presumptions that assist with proof: a publication that did not exceed what was reasonable in the circumstances enjoys a presumption of good faith, while a publication that was untrue and where the publisher took no reasonable steps to check gives rise to the opposite presumption.

Why defamation claims fail

A significant share of claims in this field turn not on the question of harm but on one of three early obstacles.

The publication does not meet any of the four tests. A sharp, offensive or unpleasant statement is not necessarily defamation. Section 1 requires harm to reputation, not hurt feelings.
The publication element was not proved. Where it was not shown that the matter reached a person other than the person affected, there is no civil cause of action under section 7, even if the words were plainly said.
A defence was available to the defendant. Truth with public interest under section 14, or one of the twelve good-faith circumstances in section 15, ends the case even where the harm was real and painful.

To these is added a practical question that is not legal at all: what was preserved. A publication deleted without admissible documentation makes it difficult to prove content and timing, and that is a common reason why a well founded matter never reaches a hearing on the merits.

Remedies that are not money

A person whose main concern is removing the publication and restoring their name is not dependent on financial compensation alone.

Section 9 of the Law allows the court, alongside a conviction for an offence under the Law, to order a prohibition on distributing copies and their forfeiture, and the publication of a correction or denial, including publication of a summary of the judgment. Section 10 addresses the manner in which such a publication is to be carried out.

In practice, combining an early demand for a correction under section 17 with an application for declaratory or injunctive relief is at times the faster route to the goal, particularly where the publication continues to appear in search results.

How damages are determined

Section 7A of the Law attracts most of the attention, and is usually quoted incorrectly.

Compensation without proof of damage. Section 7A(b) empowers the court to award compensation for a civil wrong in an amount not exceeding NIS 50,000, without the person affected having to prove loss.
Double the ceiling where there was intent to harm. Section 7A(c) allows an award of up to twice that amount where it is shown that the defamation was published with intent to harm.
In criminal proceedings too. Section 7A(a) allows a similar award to a person harmed by an offence under the Law.
No double recovery. Section 7A(d) provides that compensation under the section will not be awarded twice for the same defamation.

The point that changes the figure

Section 7A(e) provides that these amounts are updated on the 16th of every month in line with the rise in the Consumer Price Index, with the September 1998 index as the base. The ceiling in practice is therefore higher than the amount stated in the Law, and any quotation of the figure without the linkage is incomplete.

Alongside this, a person whose loss exceeds the ceiling is not confined to it: compensation without proof of damage is an additional route, not a substitute for a claim for proven loss.

Deadlines and limits worth knowing in advance

Defamation of a person who has died

Section 5 of the Law provides that publishing defamation about a person who has died is a wrong towards their spouse or child, and is not a ground for an ordinary civil action. It is a separate route, not a continuation of the deceased's own right.

Where the person affected dies after the publication

Section 25 provides that if the person affected dies within six months of the publication, their spouse, child, parent or sibling may bring proceedings within six months of the death.

Time works against the case

Beyond the statutory deadlines, an online publication also ages in evidentiary terms: comments are deleted, profiles are closed and screenshots are lost. Orderly documentation of the publication, its date and the extent of its exposure is usually the difference between a case that can be proved and one that cannot, regardless of the legal question.

In summary

Defamation is assessed against the four tests in section 1 of the Law, not against the intensity of the harm felt. It is enough that the publication was liable to humiliate, hold up to scorn or harm a person in their occupation, and a corporation falls within the definition as well. Publication may take any form, and in the civil cause of action it is enough that it reached one person other than the person affected. Against that stand the defence of truth in publication and the good-faith defence with its twelve circumstances, together with evidentiary presumptions running in both directions.

The complexity here is not in whether a publication is hurtful, but in the combination of drafting the early demand for correction properly, choosing the remedy, documenting the publication, and making a realistic assessment of the defences available to the other side. That combination calls for familiarity with the Law and with the case law interpreting it, and for professional legal representation by a lawyer practising in the field.

If something has been published that harms your good name or your business, or if you have been asked to remove a publication you stand behind, contact us and we will review the facts and the options open to you together.

Questions and answers

Frequently asked

Is negative criticism of a business defamation?

Not necessarily. The test in section 1 of the Law is whether the publication is liable to harm reputation, an occupation or a business, not whether it is unpleasant. Factual criticism in which there is public interest may fall within the defence of truth in publication under section 14, and an opinion expressed in good faith within one of the circumstances in section 15. The outcome depends on the precise wording and the context.

Something untrue was published about me. Must I file a claim?

No. Section 17 provides that a defendant asked to publish a correction or denial who fails to do so may lose the good-faith defence. A written demand for a correction is therefore a legal step rather than merely a polite approach, and it resolves some matters without proceedings.

How much can be awarded without proving loss?

Section 7A(b) sets a ceiling of NIS 50,000 for compensation without proof of damage, and section 7A(c) allows up to double that where intent to harm is shown. Importantly, section 7A(e) links these amounts to the Consumer Price Index, updated on the 16th of each month against a September 1998 base, so the ceiling in practice is higher than the figure stated in the Law.

What counts as publication, and is a single message enough?

Section 2 defines publication broadly: orally, in writing, in a drawing, in sound and by any other means. In the civil cause of action it is enough that the matter reached one person other than the person affected, under section 7. The criminal offence in section 6 requires that the publication reached two or more people and was made with intent to harm.

Can a claim be brought on behalf of someone who has died?

Section 5 provides that defamation of a person who has died is a wrong towards their spouse or child, as a separate route. Section 25 adds that where the person affected dies within six months of the publication, their spouse, child, parent or sibling may bring proceedings within six months of the death.

Can removal be sought rather than damages?

Yes. Section 9 allows the court to order the publication of a correction or denial, including a summary of the judgment, and to prohibit the distribution of copies, with section 10 addressing how that is done. Section 25A adds a duty to update where a publication concerned proceedings that ended in closure of the file or in acquittal.

All pages in this practice

Personal Injury & Torts

Has something been published that harms your name?

Tell us what was published, where and when, and who saw it. That is usually enough to say whether there is a cause of action, what the first step should be, and which defences the other side is likely to raise.

02-5953322 WhatsApp

A lawyer from the department, not a call centre We will get back to you as soon as possible No promise of outcome