A warning letter before a defamation claim: what it should include and what not

Service page: Defamation and reputation protection lawyer.

Need a warning letter on another matter, for example to a business or a supplier? See A warning letter before legal action: what it should include and what not.

Must you send a warning letter before a defamation claim?

No. The Prohibition of Defamation Law has no provision that requires sending a letter before filing a claim. Publishing defamation to one or more persons other than the injured person is a civil wrong (tort) (section 7). The cause of action arises with the publication. The Civil Procedure Regulations, 5779-2018 (תקנות סדר הדין האזרחי, התשע״ט-2018) also provide that a court proceeding is opened by filing a statement of claim (regulation 9(a)). They do not set a general duty to send a letter before that.

The Law itself gives a written demand a legal effect in two situations. Both concern a “media outlet”: a newspaper, and radio and television broadcasts provided to the public (section 11(c)). The first: the injured person demanded that the media outlet publish a correction or denial on their behalf. It must be published with a suitable headline, in the place, to the extent, with the prominence and in the manner in which the defamation was published. It must also be published within a reasonable time from receiving the demand. If not, the good-faith defense is not available to the editor, to the person who actually decided on the publication, or to the person responsible for the media outlet (section 17(a)). This applies only on three conditions. The injured person signed the demand. The correction or denial contained no defamation or other unlawful content. And its length did not go beyond what is reasonable. Some newspapers appear less than once a week. In that case, at the injured person’s demand, the correction or denial is also published in a daily newspaper (section 17(b)).

The second: a media outlet published that a criminal investigation was opened against a person, that an indictment was filed against them, or that they were convicted. Later, it was decided to close the case, not to file an indictment or to stay the proceedings. Or the person was acquitted, or their appeal was accepted. If the person demands in writing that the media outlet publish the updated decision, the media outlet must publish it within a reasonable time from the day it received the demand, with due prominence (section 25A(a)–(b)). An act or omission in breach of this duty is a civil wrong (section 25A(c)).

A warning letter also does not stop the limitation period from running. The Prohibition of Defamation Law does not set its own limitation period. So the general limitation period applies: seven years from the day the cause of action arose (sections 5(1) and 6 of the Prescription Law, 5718-1958 (חוק ההתיישנות, התשי״ח-1958)). The period is counted for a claim “for which no action has been filed”. An “action” is a civil proceeding before a court (sections 1 and 5), and a letter is not such a proceeding.

What to write in a defamation warning letter: six elements

1. The publication: the exact wording, where and when it was published, and a link if there is one.
2. Why it is harmful and why it is untrue: with facts, without name-calling.
3. The demand: removal, and publication of a correction or an apology without reservations. It should appear in the place, to the extent and in the manner in which the statement was published (section 19(4)).
4. A deadline for a response: a defined date, so that it is clear whether the demand was met.
5. In a newspaper or a broadcast: a demand to publish a correction or denial, signed by the injured person themselves, with the wording asked for. It must be of a reasonable length and without defamation or other unlawful content (section 17(a)).
6. Reservation of rights: a statement that the letter does not waive any claim or remedy.

Before you send it, keep full documentation of the publication. Take a screenshot that includes the page address, the date and the time, and keep the direct link. An online publication may be deleted after the letter arrives.

What the claim will need to prove, and what the letter describes

Defamation is something whose publication may do one of these things (section 1). 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 qualities attributed to them. It may harm them in their position, their business, their occupation or their profession. Or it may degrade them because of their race, origin, religion, place of residence, age, sex, sexual orientation or disability. A “person” for this purpose is an individual or a corporation. The sections discussed on the site: Prohibition of Defamation Law.

There must also be a “publication”. Defamation is considered published in two cases (section 2(b)). It was intended for a person other than the injured person and reached that person or another person other than the injured person. Or it was in writing and could, in the circumstances, have reached a person other than the injured person. The name does not have to appear. It is enough that the defamation and its reference to the injured person can be understood from the publication or from external circumstances (section 3).

So the letter should describe the publication itself. State exactly what was written or said, where and when, and who it reached or could have reached. Then explain why it is untrue. An exact quotation is better than a general description.

A demand letter about defamation: removal, correction or apology

When awarding compensation, the court may take some steps into account in the defendant’s favor (section 19(4)). The defendant apologized for the publication, corrected or denied the statement, or took steps to stop the sale or distribution of the publication. The condition is that the apology, correction or denial was published in the place, to the extent and in the manner in which the defamation was published, and was not qualified. This is not a defense against the claim, but a consideration in setting the compensation. So a useful demand sets out not only what must be corrected, but also where and in what form. That is: in the same place, to the same extent and without reservations.

If the matter reaches court, the court may order a ban on distributing the publication, in addition to any other remedy (section 9(a)). It may also order the publication of a correction, a denial or the judgment, at the defendant’s expense, in the place, to the extent and in the manner it sets. The defendant may have admitted that some of the statements are defamatory or untrue. Then the court may order the publication of a correction or denial even before the judgment (section 10).

The court may award compensation without proof of damage of up to NIS 84,038.36. If it was proved that the publication was made with intent to harm, it may award up to double that amount, NIS 168,076.72. These are the amounts under sections 7A(b) and 7A(c), as of the update of 16 October 2026. The amounts are updated on the 16th of every month according to the index (section 7A(e)). This is a cap, not a fixed amount. And compensation without proof of damage is not awarded more than once for the same defamation (section 7A(d)). Amounts actually awarded, and what you need to prove: A defamation claim: amounts and compensation without proof of damage.

What not to write: the letter itself may be a publication

A warning letter is something in writing, and the same rules apply to it. It may attribute something harmful to the person who published, for example that they are lying or acted with malice. If it reaches or may reach at least one other person, it may itself be a publication of defamation (section 2(b)). This can happen when a copy of the letter is sent to an employer, to clients or to members of a group. It can also happen when the letter is posted online.

The Law protects two kinds of publication made in good faith (section 15(10) and (3)). One is made only to condemn or deny defamation published earlier. The other is made to protect a legitimate personal interest. A publication is presumed to have been made in good faith if it was made in one of these circumstances and did not go beyond what is reasonable (section 16(a)). In contrast, the defense in section 13(5) does not depend on good faith. It refers to a publication “made in the course of a hearing”. A letter sent before a proceeding was opened is not mentioned in it.

So it is better to leave out of the letter:

• name-calling, smears and descriptions of the publisher’s character;
• factual allegations about the publisher that you have no way to prove;
• copies to anyone who does not need to receive the letter, such as an employer, clients or members of a group;
• publishing the letter, or a photo of it, on social media.

The defenses the other side may raise

Some publications are privileged publications and cannot serve as grounds for a claim at all (section 13(5) and (9)). Among them is a publication by a party, their lawyer or a witness “made in the course of a hearing” before a judge or a person with judicial authority. Another is a publication that the publisher is required to make by law. The truth defense requires two conditions: that the statement was true, and that there was a public interest in the publication (section 14).

The good-faith defense applies when the publication was made in good faith in one of the circumstances in section 15. Here are some examples. The relationship between the publisher and the person who received the publication placed on the publisher a legal, moral or social duty to publish (section 15(2)). The publication was made to protect a legitimate personal interest (section 15(3)). It is an expression of opinion on the injured person’s conduct in connection with a matter of public interest (section 15(4)). Or it is a complaint to an authority competent to receive complaints about the injured person (section 15(8)). The publisher is presumed to have acted in good faith if they proved two things (section 16(a)). They made the publication in one of these circumstances, and it did not go beyond what is reasonable. And the publisher is presumed not to have acted in good faith in three cases (section 16(b)). The statement was untrue and they did not believe it was true. The statement was untrue and they did not take reasonable steps before the publication to check whether it was true. Or they intended to cause more harm than was reasonable to protect the values in section 15.

Did you receive a warning letter?

Before you answer, check whether you have a defense. It may be a privileged publication (section 13), or the truth of the publication and public interest (section 14). Or it may be good faith in one of the circumstances in section 15. Your reply to the letter is also subject to the same rules (section 2). Sometimes the right step is to remove the publication and publish a correction or an apology. Deleting it does not cancel the cause of action, which arose already with the publication. But under section 19(4), the court may take into account, in your favor, an apology, a correction or a denial. They must have been published in the place, to the extent and in the manner in which the defamation was published, and must not have been qualified.

The defenses, presumptions and mitigating factors in detail, for anyone who received a letter or a statement of claim: Sued for defamation? The warning letter, the defenses and the first steps. A post or a message on social media: see Defamation on Facebook and WhatsApp. A review of a business: see A false Google review of your business. Representation in defamation claims, for injured persons and for those who are sued: Defamation and reputation protection lawyer.

Frequently asked questions

Must you send a warning letter before a defamation claim?

No. The Prohibition of Defamation Law, 5725-1965 has no provision that requires sending a letter before filing a claim. The cause of action arises with the publication (section 7). When the publication was in a newspaper or a broadcast, a demand signed by the injured person to publish a correction or denial has a legal effect (section 17(a)). If the correction or denial was not published as required and within a reasonable time, the good-faith defense is not available to the editor and to those responsible for the publication.

What do you write in a warning letter about defamation?

Six elements. First, the exact wording of the publication, and where and when it was published. Second, why it is harmful and why it is untrue, with facts and without name-calling. Third, the demand: removal, and publication of a correction or an apology without reservations, in the place, to the extent and in the manner in which the statement was published (section 19(4) of the Prohibition of Defamation Law). Fourth, a defined deadline for a response. Fifth, in a newspaper or a broadcast, a demand signed by the injured person themselves to publish a correction or denial, of a reasonable length and without defamation or other unlawful content (section 17(a)). Sixth, a statement that the letter does not waive any claim or remedy. You send the letter only to the person who published, without copies to others.

Can the warning letter itself be considered defamation?

Yes, if it attributes something harmful to the person it is sent to, and it reaches or may reach at least one other person (section 2(b) of the Prohibition of Defamation Law). For example, copies are sent to others, or it is posted online. A publication made in good faith only to condemn or deny defamation published earlier is protected (section 15(10)). So you write the letter with facts, without name-calling, and send it only to the person who published.

What is the value of an apology received because of the letter?

An apology, a correction or a denial does not cancel the cause of action. But the court may take them into account in the publisher’s favor when it awards compensation (section 19(4) of the Prohibition of Defamation Law). They must have been published in the place, to the extent and in the manner in which the defamation was published, and must not have been qualified.

Does a warning letter stop the limitation period from running?

No. The Prohibition of Defamation Law does not set its own limitation period. So the general limitation period applies: seven years from the day the cause of action arose (sections 5(1) and 6 of the Prescription Law, 5718-1958). The period is counted for a claim for which no “action” has been filed. An “action” is a civil proceeding before a court (sections 1 and 5), and a letter is not such a proceeding.

How much time should a warning letter give for a reply?

The law does not set a deadline for an ordinary warning letter. It is advisable to set a defined and reasonable deadline, so that it is clear whether the demand was met. For a publication in a media outlet, the law gives a deadline for publishing the correction or denial. It speaks of “a reasonable time from receiving the demand” (section 17(a) of the Prohibition of Defamation Law).

I received a warning letter about defamation. Do I have to answer?

The law does not require you to answer, but you should not ignore it. First check whether you have a defense: a privileged publication (section 13), truth and public interest (section 14) or good faith (section 15). Does the publication contain a mistake? Then consider an apology or a correction, published without reservation, in the place, to the extent and in the manner in which the statement was published. The court may take it into account in your favor when awarding compensation (section 19(4)).