Sued for defamation? Warning letter, the defenses and the first steps

Service page: Defamation and libel on Facebook and WhatsApp: removal and claims.

This guide is for anyone who published a post, a comment, a review or a message, and received a warning letter or a statement of claim alleging defamation because of it. It explains what to do in the first days, which defenses the Prohibition of Defamation Law, 5725-1965 provides, and what can make the situation worse.

You received a warning letter: what do you do first?

1. Keep a copy of what was published, including the date, the comments and the shares, before any change. The defenses are examined according to what was actually written and in what context, and the copy also serves you.
2. Do not respond publicly and do not publish again. Re-sharing, quoting the words in a reply, or publishing the letter together with the original words reaches more readers, and every such distribution may be a “publication” in itself (section 2).
3. Read the letter in detail: which sentences exactly are said to be defamation, what is demanded, and by when.
4. Check whether you have a defense: a privileged publication (section 13), truth and public interest (section 14), or good faith (sections 15–16). The details are below.
5. Consider removal, a correction or an apology. Deleting does not cancel the cause of action, which already arose with the publication (section 7). But an apology, a correction or a denial, and steps to stop the distribution, are circumstances that the court may count in your favor when awarding compensation, under the conditions in section 19(4) (details below).
6. Reply in writing only after the check, with facts and without counter-accusations. Your reply is also subject to the same rules (sections 1–2).

You received a statement of claim: what are the deadlines?

A statement of claim opens proceedings. Under the Civil Procedure Regulations, 5779-2018 (תקנות סדר הדין האזרחי, התשע״ט-2018), a statement of defense is filed within sixty days from the date the statement of claim was served, and the court may extend the deadline if it is convinced that there are reasons that justify it (regulation 9(b)). In a claim whose amount or the value of whose subject does not exceed NIS 75,000, the proceeding is as a rule conducted on the expedited proceeding track (regulation 78(a)(1)): the statement of defense is filed within forty-five days from the date the statement of claim was served (regulation 80(a)), and you attach to it an affidavit verifying the facts in it and a list of the relevant documents, with a copy of those you have (regulation 79(a)). A defendant who did not file a statement of defense on time may find that the court gave judgment on the basis of the statement of claim alone (regulation 130). When special rules of procedure have been set by law for the matter, they are the ones that apply (regulation 180(b)). So in a Small Claims Court, the defendant is invited to file a statement of defense within 30 days from the day the summons was served (regulation 4(b) of the Small Claims Adjudication (Rules of Procedure) Regulations, 5737-1976 (תקנות שיפוט בתביעות קטנות (סדרי דין), התשל״ז-1976)). So check right away which deadline applies to your proceeding.

Alongside the civil claim, publishing defamation with intent to harm, to two or more people other than the injured person, is also a criminal offense (section 6), and the injured person may file a private criminal complaint (kovlana) over it (section 8). The defenses in sections 13–15 apply in criminal and civil proceedings alike.

Which publications are fully permitted (privileged publications)?

Section 13 lists publications that cannot be the basis of any criminal or civil proceeding at all, with no need to prove truth or good faith. These are the ones that come up most often for a private person or a business:

• a publication by a party, their counsel or a witness, made during a hearing before a judge, an arbitrator or another person with judicial or quasi-judicial authority under law (section 13(5));
• a correct and fair report of what was said or happened at a public session of such a hearing, provided the publication was not prohibited (section 13(7));
• a publication that the publisher is required to make by law or by an instruction of an authority competent to give it (section 13(9));
• a correct and fair copy or summary of a register kept under an enactment, or of another document open to public inspection under an enactment (section 13(10)).

A post, a review or a message in a group are not on the list in themselves, so the defenses common for such publications are the truth of the publication and good faith.

When is truth a defense?

Truth alone is not enough. Under section 14, it is a good defense “that the matter published was true and the publication was in the public interest”: two cumulative conditions. The defense will not be denied only because the truth of a side detail that involves no real harm was not proved. The defendant must prove the truth, so the documentation the publication relied on matters as soon as the letter arrives.

When is the good-faith defense available?

Section 15 protects someone who made the publication in good faith in one of the 12 circumstances it lists. These are the ones that come up most often in online publications and reviews:

The complaint defense (section 15(8)) does not cover any other publication of the complaint, of the fact that it was filed or of its content. A complaint to an authority can be protected, but publishing it in a public post does not enjoy this defense.

What do the presumptions in section 16 provide?

Section 16 sets out who has to prove what. If the defendant proved that they made the publication in one of the circumstances in section 15, and that the publication did not go beyond what is reasonable in those circumstances, they are presumed to have made it in good faith (section 16(a)). In contrast, the publication is presumed to have been made not in good faith if one of the following applies to it (section 16(b)):

• the matter published was not true, and the publisher did not believe it was true;
• the matter published was not true, and before publishing, the publisher did not take reasonable measures to find out whether it was true;
• the publisher intended to cause harm to a greater extent than was reasonable to protect the values that section 15 protects.

So what you checked before publishing, and how you worded it, directly affect the defense. Wording harsher than necessary may take the publication outside “what is reasonable”.

An apology, a correction or deletion: what do they change?

They do not cancel the cause of action, which arose with the publication (section 7), but they can affect the compensation. Section 19 lists circumstances that the court may take into account in the defendant’s favor when it awards compensation:

• the defamation was only a repetition of what had already been said, and the defendant named the source they relied on (section 19(1));
• the defendant was convinced that the defamation was true (section 19(2));
• the defendant did not mean the injured person (section 19(3));
• the defendant apologized, corrected or denied the statement, or took steps to stop the distribution of the publication, provided 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 (section 19(4)).

It follows that an apology in a private message about a public post, or an apology that is qualified later on, does not meet the condition in section 19(4). The court may also order the publication of a correction or denial at the defendant’s expense (section 9(a)(2)), and if the defendant admitted that some of the words are defamatory or that some of them are not true, it may do so even before judgment is given (section 10).

What not to do after you received a letter?

• Do not publish again. Any further distribution of the words, even in reply to the letter, may be a “publication” in itself (section 2).
• Do not reply with a counter-accusation. A reply that attributes something harmful to the sender, and reaches another person, may create a new cause of action against you (sections 1–2).
• Do not delete before you have kept a copy. Without the copy it is hard to show exactly what was written and in what context.
• Do not threaten the sender with another publication or with exposing information about them so that they drop the claim. Section 428 of the Penal Law, 5737-1977 (חוק העונשין, התשל״ז-1977) prohibits threatening a person with publishing something about them, or with unlawful harm to their good name or livelihood, in order to induce them to do or refrain from doing an act they are entitled to do.
• Do not ignore a statement of claim. A statement of defense is filed by the deadline that applies to the proceeding (as a rule, regulation 9(b); on the expedited proceeding track, regulation 80(a)), and if it was not filed on time, the court may give judgment on the basis of the statement of claim alone (regulation 130).

Where to go from here?

A Facebook post or a message in a WhatsApp group: see Defamation on Facebook and WhatsApp. A review of a business: see A false Google review of your business. What a warning letter should include, from the side of the person sending it: Warning letter before a defamation claim. Representation in defamation claims, for injured people and for those who are sued: Defamation and reputation.

FAQ

I received a warning letter about a post I wrote. Do I have to remove it?

A warning letter is not an order. A ban on distribution, confiscation or a compulsory correction are ordered by the court (section 9 of the Prohibition of Defamation Law, 5725-1965). But steps to stop the distribution, and an apology, correction or denial published in the place, to the extent and in the manner in which the defamation was published and without reservation, are circumstances that the court may consider in your favor when it awards compensation (section 19(4)).

I wrote the truth. Is that enough to defend myself?

Not always. The truth defense requires two conditions: that the matter published was true, and that the publication was in the public interest (section 14 of the Prohibition of Defamation Law). Truth without a public interest is not enough, but the good-faith defense may be available in one of the circumstances in section 15.

If I delete the post, will the claim be canceled?

No. Publishing defamation is a civil wrong already at the time of publication (section 7 of the Prohibition of Defamation Law), and deleting does not cancel it. Steps to stop the distribution, and an apology or correction published in the place, to the extent and in the manner in which the statement was published and without reservation, are a consideration that the court may count in your favor (section 19(4)). Before deleting, keep a copy.

May I publish online the warning letter I received?

Be careful. A publication that repeats the original words, or that attributes something harmful to the sender and reaches another person, may be a new publication of defamation (sections 1 and 2 of the Prohibition of Defamation Law). If you want to respond, do so after checking the defenses, with facts and without repeating the words.

How much could I be ordered to pay in a defamation claim?

Without the plaintiff proving damage, the court may order compensation of up to NIS 84,038.36, and if it was proved that the publication was made with intent to harm — up to double that amount, NIS 168,076.72 (sections 7A(b) and 7A(c) of the Prohibition of Defamation Law, as of the update of 16 October 2026; the amounts are updated on the 16th of each month according to the index, section 7A(e)). These are ceilings and not a fixed amount, and compensation without proof of damage will not be awarded more than once for the same defamation (section 7A(d)). A plaintiff who proves actual damage is not limited to these ceilings, and can claim the damage they proved. In setting the amount, the court may take into account in your favor the circumstances in section 19, for example an apology or correction published as required by section 19(4).