Defamation claims in Israel: how much is awarded, and what you must prove

Service page: Defamation lawyer: protecting your reputation.

Compensation without proof of damage: what section 7A says

Compensation without proof of damage in a defamation claim is governed by section 7A of the Prohibition of Defamation Law, 5725-1965. This is the text:

Three practical conclusions follow from the text. The compensation is a ceiling, not a fixed amount (“may… not exceeding”). Doubling under section 7A(c) is not automatic: it depends on intent to harm having been proved. Under section 7A(d), compensation without proof of damage is not awarded more than once for the same defamation. So splitting the case between proceedings does not multiply the amount. You choose the proceeding and its scope only once. So it is worth looking at the case with a defamation lawyer even before you send a warning letter about defamation.

Why the number in the Law is not the amount in force

Section 7A(e) is the section that almost no publication quotes, and it is the one that changes the number. Under it, the amounts are updated on the 16th of every month. The update follows the rate at which the new index has risen compared with the base index. The “new index” is the index of the month before the month of the update, and the “base index” is the September 1998 index.

What this means: NIS 50,000 is the base amount from 1998, and the ceiling in force on the date you file the claim is higher. To find the right amount for a given date, compare the consumer price index of the previous month with the September 1998 index, and multiply. Do you write “up to NIS 50,000” in the statement of claim without linking it to the index? Then you give up part of the ceiling in advance. If you write an updated amount, you must attach the calculation.

The amount in force in the update of 16 October 2026, and the calculation

In the update of 16 October 2026, the “new index” is the September 2026 index, published on 15 October 2026. Here are the figures and the result:

The calculation links NIS 50,000 from the September 1998 index to the September 2026 index. It uses the consumer price index data of the Central Bureau of Statistics and its official linkage calculator. Because the update is monthly, the amount changes on the 16th of every month. In a statement of claim, you must calculate it against the index of the month before the filing date and set out the calculation.

The same mechanism applies, with different numbers, in the parallel laws. Section 29A of the Protection of Privacy Law, 5741-1981 states the same NIS 50,000, but links it to the May 2007 index. So the ceiling under it in the update of 16 October 2026 is NIS 72,221.22, and double the amount is NIS 144,442.44. Sometimes both heads of claim are examined in the same case, but each of them is linked to the index separately.

What you need to prove in a defamation claim: the three elements

One: that it is defamation (section 1). Under the Law, defamation is something whose publication may do one of these things. It may humiliate a person in the eyes of others or make them a target of hatred, contempt or ridicule. It may degrade them because of acts, conduct or traits attributed to them. It may harm them in their position (public or other), business, occupation or profession. Or it may degrade them because of their race, origin, religion, place of residence, age, sex, sexual orientation or disability. For this section, a “person” is an individual or a corporation, so a company can also sue for harm to its good name.

Two: that there was a publication (section 2). The definition is deliberately broad: a publication is oral, written or printed, “including a drawing, a figure, a movement, a sound and any other means”. It is enough that the matter was intended for a person other than the injured person and reached that person or another person. If it was in writing, it is enough that the writing could, in the circumstances, have reached a person other than the injured person. One reader other than the injured person is enough. See also: Defamation on Facebook and WhatsApp and A false Google review of your business.

Three: that the publication refers to the injured person. Their name does not have to be mentioned. It is enough that a reasonable reader can link them to the publication. The test for interpreting the publication is objective. It is the meaning a reasonable person would give it in the circumstances. It is not the publisher’s intention, and not the injured person’s sensitivity. This is the rule set in the Schocken Network case (4534/02). That case also held that the genre and the context must be taken into account: a satirical column is not read as a factual report.

An important note: defamation of a group that is not a corporation (section 4) gives no grounds at all for a civil action. It also gives no grounds for a private criminal complaint (kovlana). Harm to a group as such cannot be sued for. Only a person who can be personally identified can sue.

Amounts awarded in defamation claims: ten judgments with case numbers

“How much do you get” is not a question with one number, or an average, for an answer. The table below brings together ten judgments whose full text was checked: case number, court, panel, date and the amount actually awarded. The range is from NIS 1 to NIS 280,000. In three of them, the claim was dismissed against a defendant, and the court ordered the plaintiff to pay that defendant’s costs. This is the real spread in this field.

The full text of the judgments was checked on 20 September 2026. Costs are shown separately from the compensation. A judgment is not a binding precedent unless it was given by the Supreme Court, and every case is assessed on its own facts.

What the table shows, and what it doesn’t

One. The statutory ceiling is not a price. In two cases where the publication was held to be defamation, the compensation was NIS 1 and NIS 5,000. In two other cases, it was NIS 100,000 and NIS 280,000. The difference does not come from the Law but from the facts.

Two. The high amounts in the table are not only statutory compensation. In the cases where tens or hundreds of thousands of shekels were awarded, the publications attributed corruption, fraud or an offense to an identified person. They also had wide circulation and came in a series of publications, not in a single publication.

Three. When there are several defendants, compensation is set for each defendant separately, according to what that defendant published. In one case, the amounts ranged from NIS 10,000 to NIS 65,000 between defendants in the same proceeding. In another, they ranged from NIS 1,000 to NIS 8,000 for each commenter.

Four. A claim that is dismissed costs money. In three of the cases in the table, the claim was dismissed against a defendant, and the plaintiff had to pay that defendant’s costs: NIS 6,000, NIS 10,000 and NIS 50,000. So choosing the defendants is a financial decision, not only a legal one. This is especially true when you decide whether to sue a platform or a publisher who has a defense.

Five. Double compensation under section 7A(c) is not granted just because the publication is serious. In the case in the table where malicious intent was claimed, the claim was expressly rejected, and compensation was set under section 7A(b) only.

What decides the amount of compensation

Section 19 of the Law expressly lists mitigating circumstances. The case law adds considerations that come up again and again in the judgments in the table:

• How widely it actually spread: not the number of followers but the number of views. In the Nidaily case, the court noted expressly that the publications did not spread significantly as a result of the defendants’ actions.
• How serious the allegation is: attributing an offense, fraud or corruption to an identified person is at the top end. Insults or a blunt opinion in a political argument are at the bottom end.
• Harm to the occupation: a publication aimed at the injured person’s business or profession is valued higher than harm to dignity alone.
• A series compared with a single publication: a set of publications over time is assessed as a whole. This is what justified the high amounts in the table.
• Conduct after the publication: under section 19(4), an apology, correction or denial can count in the defendant’s favor. Under section 19(2)–(3), so can a belief in the truth of the statements, or no intention to refer to the injured person. The condition is that they were published in the same place, to the same extent and in the same way as the defamation, without reservations. Section 19(1) gives mitigation for repeating what someone else said while naming the source.
• Deterrence: the judgment in the Levin case said expressly that deterring publications of this kind was taken into account in setting the amount.

There is no “defamation price list”: what the court considers

Statutory compensation exists to allow a claim even when the damage cannot be quantified, not to ensure that the full ceiling is awarded. The case law looks at several things, among others. How widely did the publication spread? How serious is the allegation? What is the injured person’s standing, and how was their occupation harmed? And how did the publisher behave after the publication? Section 19 of the Law expressly lists circumstances that the court may count in the defendant’s favor when it awards compensation. The publication repeated what someone else said and named the source. The publisher was convinced the statements were true. They did not mean to refer to the injured person. Or they apologized, corrected or denied. The apology counts only if it was published in the same place, to the same extent and in the same way as the defamation, without reservations.

This gives both sides a tactical consideration. For the defendant, a full and quick apology is the least expensive tool for reducing exposure. For the plaintiff, a demand for removal and an apology that was refused is evidence that supports the compensation.

The defenses, and what they really require

Privileged publications (section 13). This is a closed list, and these publications cannot be grounds for a criminal or civil trial at all. The list: a publication at a government meeting; a publication on behalf of the government or a government minister in their official capacity; and a publication by the State Comptroller. It also covers statements made in a proceeding before a judge, an arbitrator or a commission of inquiry (including statements by a party, their lawyer and a witness), and a correct and fair report on them.

Truth of the publication (section 14). This is the main defense. It requires two cumulative conditions: what was published was true, and also the publication was in the public interest. Truth without public interest is not enough, and this is the most common mistake in statements of defense. The section adds one point. The defense is not lost only because the truth of a side detail was not proved, if that detail does no real harm.

Good faith (section 15). The section lists twelve circumstances in which a publication in good faith is protected. They include these. The publisher did not know, and did not have to know, that the injured person existed. The relationship between the publisher and the recipient placed a legal, moral or social duty on the publisher to publish. The publication protected a legitimate personal interest. It expressed an opinion on the injured person’s conduct in a public role or on a matter of public interest. It criticized a work or an act that the injured person presented in public. Or it was filing a complaint with the authority competent to receive it, or with the injured person’s superior. But the defense does not apply to publishing the complaint outside that channel.

Did you receive a warning letter or a statement of claim? The defenses and the first steps from the point of view of the person being sued: Sued for defamation? A warning letter, the defenses and the first steps.

Section 16: the section that decides cases

The burden of proof is built on two opposing presumptions. Under section 16(a), the defendant is presumed to have acted in good faith if they proved two things. The publication was made in one of the circumstances in section 15, and it did not go beyond what was reasonable in those circumstances. Under section 16(b), the publication is presumed to have been made not in good faith in three cases. First: what was published was untrue, and the publisher did not believe it was true. Second: it was untrue, and the publisher did not take reasonable steps before the publication to find out whether it was true. Third: the publisher intended to cause more harm than was reasonable to protect the values in section 15.

The second of these grounds is the heart of the case: “I didn’t know” is not a defense. The practical question is what checks were made before the publication and what was recorded from them. Section 17 adds another exclusion. Take defamation published in a medium of communication. The injured person demanded in writing that a correction or denial be published. If it was not published in a suitable place, to a suitable extent, with suitable prominence and within a reasonable time, the editor and the person responsible lose the good-faith defense.

Remedies that are not money

Section 9 gives the court further powers, in addition to any other penalty and remedy. It may ban distribution of the publication or order the confiscation of copies of it. It may also order the publication of a correction or denial, or of the judgment, at the defendant’s expense, in the place and manner the court decides. Section 10 allows an interim order to publish a correction even before the judgment. This applies when the defendant has admitted that some of the statements are untrue. And section 25A creates a duty to update. Suppose it was published that an investigation was opened or an indictment was filed against a person. Later, the case was closed or the person was acquitted. At the person’s written request, the medium of communication must then publish the updated decision, with suitable prominence.

Written and spoken defamation: a distinction that does not exist in Israel

In English and American law, written defamation is distinguished from spoken statements, and each has its own rules of proof. In Israel there is no such distinction. Section 2 covers both in the same definition, and the same remedies apply to a post, a voice message and a statement in a meeting. “Libel” (hotza’at diba) is not a term in Israeli law either: it is a popular name for the same civil wrong. The practical difference between writing and speech is not in the law but in the evidence. A written publication leaves a record, and spoken words usually do not. What defamation is under the law, and the sections discussed on this site: the Prohibition of Defamation Law.

The criminal route, and the limitation period for a defamation claim

Section 6 creates an offense. It reads: “A person who publishes defamation, with intent to harm, to two or more persons other than the injured person is liable to one year’s imprisonment.” The three elements are cumulative, and the usual route is a private criminal complaint (kovlana). Section 8 states expressly that this is an offense for which the injured person may prosecute by a private complaint. A conviction also allows compensation for the injured person under section 7A(a).

The limitation period: the Prohibition of Defamation Law does not set a limitation period of its own. Under section 7 of the Law, publishing defamation is a civil wrong to which the provisions of the Torts Ordinance [New Version] apply. So the general limitation period of the Prescription Law, 5718-1958 applies. It is seven years for a claim that does not concern land (section 5(1)). It is counted from the day the cause of action arose (section 6). Sometimes the facts were hidden from the plaintiff for reasons beyond their control. Then the period is counted from the day the plaintiff learned of them (section 8). The common claim that “there is only one year” is wrong.

Frequently asked questions

How much do you get in a defamation claim?

Section 7A(b) of the Prohibition of Defamation Law, 5725-1965 sets a ceiling of 50,000 new shekels without proof of damage. Section 7A(c) allows up to double that amount when it was proved that the publication was made with intent to harm. These are base amounts from 1998. Under section 7A(e), they are updated on the 16th of every month by the consumer price index, with September 1998 as the base index. So the ceiling in force is higher than the stated number. In the update of 16 October 2026, the new index is the September 2026 index. The ceiling under section 7A(b) is then 84,038.36 new shekels, and under section 7A(c) it is 168,076.72 new shekels. This is a ceiling, not a tariff: the court “may” award up to it. It considers how widely the publication spread, how serious the allegation is and the publisher’s conduct. Beyond this, you can claim proven financial damage, with no ceiling.

What do you have to prove to win a claim for harm to your good name?

Three elements. First, the matter meets the definition of defamation in section 1. That is, its publication may humiliate or degrade a person, or harm them in their position, business or profession. Second, there was a publication within the meaning of section 2. It is enough that the matter reached one person other than the injured person. Any means counts: orally, in writing, in a picture, in a sound or by any other means. Third, that the publication refers to the injured person in a way a reasonable reader can identify. The test for interpreting the publication is objective: what a reasonable person would understand from it in the circumstances, not what the publisher meant. A corporation may sue; a group that is not a corporation may not, under section 4.

How do you sue for libel (hotza'at diba)?

“Libel” (hotza’at diba) is the common name for defamation, and the claim is filed under the Prohibition of Defamation Law. The order of steps is as follows. Record the publication and who saw it. The basic element is that it reached a person other than the injured person. For a publication in writing, it is enough that it could have reached such a person (section 2(b)). Check that it meets the definition in section 1 and is not one of the privileged publications in section 13. Then choose a route: a civil claim for the civil wrong in section 7. If the publication was made with intent to harm and to two or more persons, you can also file a private criminal complaint (kovlana) (sections 6 and 8). In the statement of claim, set out the remedies. One is compensation without proof of damage under section 7A, linked to the index. The other is orders under section 9: a ban on distribution, and publication of a correction or denial. As a rule, the civil claim becomes time-barred seven years from the day the cause of action arose. This is under sections 5(1) and 6 of the Prescription Law.

What defenses does the defendant have in a defamation claim?

Three groups. First, privileged publications under section 13. This is a closed list that gives no grounds for a claim at all. Among others, it includes statements made in a legal proceeding, and publications on behalf of the government or the State Comptroller. Second, the truth defense under section 14. It requires two cumulative conditions: the matter was true, and also the publication was in the public interest. Third, the good-faith defense under section 15. It applies in one of twelve circumstances. They include a legal or moral duty to publish, protecting a legitimate personal interest, and expressing an opinion on conduct in a public role. They also include criticism of a work presented in public, and filing a complaint with the competent authority.

Why are defamation claims dismissed?

The recurring reasons come from the Law itself. What was published does not meet the definition of “defamation” in section 1. A “publication” was not proved. That is, it was not proved that the matter reached a person other than the injured person, or, for writing, that it could have reached such a person (section 2(b)). The publication concerned the public or a group that is not a corporation. For them, there is no cause of action for a civil claim (section 4). The publication is a privileged publication (section 13(5)). An example is statements made by a party, their lawyer or a witness in a court proceeding. The defendant proved that the matter was true and that the publication was in the public interest (section 14). Or the defendant published in good faith in one of the circumstances in section 15. A presumption of good faith arises when the publication did not go beyond what was reasonable (section 16(a)). In three of the cases in the table above, the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs to a defendant against whom the claim was dismissed.

Is there a “price list” for compensation in a defamation claim?

No. Section 7A of the Prohibition of Defamation Law sets a ceiling, not a tariff. Without proof of damage, the court may award compensation of no more than NIS 84,038.36. When it was proved that the publication was made with intent to harm, it may award up to NIS 168,076.72. These amounts are as of the update of 16 October 2026. Within the ceiling, the court considers the circumstances of the case. Section 19 lists circumstances it may take into account in the defendant’s favor. One example is an apology published in the same place and in the same way as the defamation. For the amounts actually awarded, see the table of ten judgments on this page.

What amounts are actually awarded in defamation claims?

There is no “price list” in this field. In ten judgments whose full text was checked, the amounts ranged from NIS 1 to NIS 280,000. In three of them, the claim was dismissed against a defendant, and the plaintiff had to pay that defendant’s costs: NIS 6,000, NIS 10,000 and NIS 50,000. The high amounts were awarded where corruption, fraud or an offense was attributed to an identified injured person. In those cases there was a series of publications with wide circulation. For a single publication, and for insults said in a political argument, much lower amounts were awarded. With several defendants, compensation was set for each defendant separately, according to what that defendant published. Double compensation under section 7A(c) is not automatic and requires proof of intent to harm.

How long do you have to file a defamation claim?

The Prohibition of Defamation Law does not set a special limitation period. Publishing defamation is a civil wrong under section 7 of the Law, and the provisions of the Torts Ordinance [New Version] apply to it. So the general limitation period of the Prescription Law, 5718-1958 applies. It is seven years for a claim that does not concern land, under section 5(1). It runs from the day the cause of action arose, under section 6. Sometimes the facts that make up the cause of action were hidden from the plaintiff for reasons beyond their control. Then section 8 moves the start of the period to the day the plaintiff learned of them. The claim that there is only one year is wrong.

Which Supreme Court judgments set the framework for awarding compensation?

Three. The first is an application for leave to appeal, LCA 10520/03 Itamar Ben Gvir v. Amnon Dankner (judgment of 12 November 2006). The appeal was accepted by a majority, and the compensation for the harm to the good name was set at NIS 1. This is the sharpest reminder that a statutory ceiling is not a tariff. The second is CFH 2121/12 Ploni v. Dr. Ilana Dayan Orbach, a further hearing before a panel of nine justices, decided on 18 September 2014. The court discussed the good-faith defense in journalistic publication. A majority of eight justices did not change the outcome of the judgment of 8 February 2012 in CA 751/10. The third is another application for leave to appeal, LCA 1239/19 Yoel Shaul v. Nidaily Communication Ltd. of 8 January 2020. The court held that sharing a publication on social media is a “publication” under section 2 of the Law. Clicking “like” is not a “publication”.

Can you sue for defamation in small claims?

Yes. An individual may file a claim of up to NIS 39,900 (as of 1 January 2026) in the Small Claims Court. This includes a defamation claim (section 60(a) of the Courts Law). In a small claim, you appear without a lawyer; representation is allowed only with the court’s permission and for special reasons (section 63(a)). Some claims center on a dispute about the truth of the publication or about good faith, with many witnesses and documents. Such a claim is usually better suited to the Magistrates’ Court.