Medical Malpractice Claims in Israel
This guide follows the practical path of a medical negligence matter: when it is worth looking into, which records are needed, what the expert opinion must contain, who the claim is brought against, and which parallel routes are worth checking at the same time.
When it is worth looking into
Not every difficult outcome justifies a legal review, but there are situations where it is worth at least checking. These recur most often:
- A delayed diagnosis. A finding that appeared in an earlier test and was not acted on, or a repeated complaint that led to no investigation.
- A complication that was not explained in advance, particularly where it is a known risk of that procedure.
- A gap between what was said and what happened. A procedure that expanded, treatment given without an alternative being discussed, or a decision taken without involvement.
- A condition that worsened after treatment in a way that does not fit the expected course of the illness.
The review itself commits to nothing. It checks whether there is a basis, and in some cases the answer is that there is not.
The first step: the medical file
Every medical negligence matter begins with assembling the records, not with a legal meeting. What is needed:
- Hospital records and discharge summaries.
- Operation notes and anaesthesia charts.
- Laboratory results, and imaging together with the reports.
- Follow-up notes from the clinic and the community setting.
- Correspondence with the treating body, including enquiries and replies.
An incomplete file is the most common reason a well founded matter does not progress. A medical expert cannot give an opinion on an oral account, and an opinion resting on incomplete records will not stand against the opinion from the other side.
The medical expert opinion
This is the document that decides the case. It is written by a specialist in the same field in which the treatment was given, and must address three questions:
- What the accepted professional standard was at the time of the treatment and in its circumstances.
- Whether the conduct departed from it, and in precisely what respect.
- Whether that departure caused the harm, as distinct from the course of the illness itself.
An opinion that says only that the outcome was severe, without answering those three questions, is not a basis for a claim. More on the medical opinion in a disability claim page.
Who the claim is brought against
The defendant is not necessarily the treating doctor. In most cases the claim is directed at the body within which the treatment was given - the hospital, the health fund or the clinic - and at their insurers, who in practice conduct the defence and the negotiations.
That has a practical consequence: the process is not a personal confrontation with the practitioner but proceedings against an institutional body and an insurer. It is also why the other side arrives with its own expert opinion and with accumulated experience in similar matters.
The stages
- Assembling the medical file and an initial check of whether there is a basis.
- An expert opinion on behalf of the claimant.
- A preliminary approach to the treating body and the insurer, which sometimes ends in settlement.
- Filing the claim together with the expert opinion.
- A counter opinion, and at times the appointment of a court expert.
- Trial or settlement, depending on how the opinions develop.
The process is not short. Where the medical condition is still changing there is sense in waiting until it stabilises, so that the loss is assessed on settled facts.
Parallel routes worth checking
A negligence claim is not necessarily the only route. Depending on the circumstances, separate and independent entitlements may exist:
- Before the National Insurance Institute, where the injury gives rise to entitlement under the relevant branch.
- Under private insurance - health cover, loss of earning capacity, or long term care cover.
These are separate routes with their own recognition rules, and they do not replace the negligence claim. They do interact, so it is worth mapping all of them early rather than after one has already been decided.
Four mistakes that recur
- Waiting. As time passes records are harder to assemble and recollection fades. The time limits are also running.
- Relying on a conversation rather than a record. An explanation given orally and not documented is hard to prove, in both directions.
- Instructing an expert from the wrong field. An opinion from an adjacent specialty is weakened against an expert from precisely the same field.
- Giving up early. An initial reply from the medical institution rejecting the complaint is not the end of the road, and it is given before the file has been reviewed by an expert on the patient's behalf.
In summary
A medical negligence claim is built in a set order: complete documentation, an expert opinion from the same field addressing the standard, the departure and causation, and then an approach to the treating body and its insurer. The defendant is usually the institution rather than the practitioner, and alongside the claim there may be parallel routes before the National Insurance Institute and under private insurance.
The complexity here is not in filing documents but in the professional question beneath them: what the standard was, in what respect there was a departure, and what it caused. Answering those questions calls for a complete medical file, the right choice of expert, and professional legal representation by a lawyer practising in the field.
If you or a family member suffered harm as a result of medical treatment, contact us and we will review the facts and the options open to you together.
Frequently asked
How do I know whether there is a case at all?
Who is sued, the doctor?
How long does a case like this take?
The hospital replied that there was no negligence. Is that the end?
Can a claim run alongside National Insurance benefits?
Which records should be collected?
All pages in this practice
Defamation · Road accidents · Medical negligence
Defamation Claims: The GuideDefamationRoad Accident Compensation LawMaking a Road Accident ClaimFatal Road AccidentsCompensation from KarnitLiability and Burden of ProofMedical Malpractice ClaimsThe Medical OpinionInformed ConsentPrinciples of liability · Work accidents
Joint TortfeasorsAbsolute LiabilityCompensation for a Work AccidentWork disability claimOccupational diseaseMicrotrauma injuryCommuting the disability pensionHarmed by medical treatment?
Tell us what happened, when, and which records you already hold. We will look at what is missing, which expert is needed, and what the first step should be.