HOME/JURISDICTIONS/IL

IL — Country Profile

Israel

49TOTAL
49OFFICIAL SOURCES
3TOPIC AREAS
Court Case49
Generative AIJudicial & Law EnforcementLiability & Accountability
Court Case✓ Official

Kibbutz Beit Nir v. Ronen Marciano

Lawyer used Unidentified in proceedings before the National Labor Court. Fabricated: Case Law | Court found that submissions contained authorities produced by use of AI that were fabricated or nonexistent. Outcome: Monetary Penalty.

Court: National Labor CourtParty: LawyerTool: Unidentified
Fine: 2500 ILS
22 March 2026Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Ben-Cohen v. Municipality of Ramat Gan

Lawyer appeared before the Supreme Court. Fabricated: Legal Norm | Municipality relied on and quoted sections (2.1, 2.3, 4.1) of a non-existent Ministry of Education Director-General Circular 5783/4(a) (1.9.2022); court found the circular and the quoted passages do not exist. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.

Court: Supreme CourtParty: Lawyer
Fine: 30000 ILS
22 March 2026Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Natalia Geller v. Eyal Nun, Adv.

Lawyer appeared before the Tel Aviv Regional Labor Court. Outcome: Monetary sanction.

Court: Tel Aviv Regional Labor CourtParty: Lawyer
Fine: 1500 ILS
19 March 2026Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Ploni v. Log-On Software Ltd. et al.

Lawyer appeared before the Regional Labor Court of Tel Aviv-Jaffa. Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Monetary Sanction.

Court: Regional Labor Court of Tel Aviv-JaffaParty: Lawyer
Fine: 2500 ILS
12 February 2026Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Tarek Jabarin v. National Insurance Institute

Lawyer appeared before the Haifa Regional Labor Court. Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Monetary Penalty.

Court: Haifa Regional Labor CourtParty: Lawyer
Fine: 4000 ILS
25 January 2026Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Cohen v. Egged Transportation Ltd

Pro Se Litigant appeared before the Magistrates Court of Jerusalem. Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Order to Amend.

Court: Magistrates Court of JerusalemParty: Pro Se Litigant
25 January 2026Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Gonen v. Ashkenazi

Lawyer appeared before the Tel Aviv Magistrate Court. Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Claim dismissed.

Court: Tel Aviv Magistrate CourtParty: Lawyer
22 January 2026Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Vanderberg v. Shviro

Pro Se Litigant appeared before the Rehovot Small Claims Court. Fabricated: Case Law | 4 fake citations Outcome: Monetary Sanction.

Court: Rehovot Small Claims CourtParty: Pro Se Litigant
Fine: 3000 ILS
12 January 2026Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Alami Nature Electricity Ltd. v. Nof Ganusar Agricultural Cooperative

Lawyer appeared before the D. Nazareth. Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Legal costs denied (despite prevailing).

Court: D. NazarethParty: Lawyer
11 January 2026Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Herzel Hagigi v. Official Receiver

Pro Se Litigant appeared before the Supreme Court. Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Appeal dismissed, monetary sanction.

Court: Supreme CourtParty: Pro Se Litigant
Fine: 5000 ILS
28 December 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Mag 7 Ltd. et al. v. Tederi et al.

Lawyer appeared before the District Court, Tel Aviv-Yafo. Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Monetary Sanction; Order to amend pleading.

Court: District Court, Tel Aviv-YafoParty: Lawyer
Fine: 10000 ILS
25 December 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Tsafrir v. Goldberg

Pro Se Litigant appeared before the Supreme Court. Fabricated: Case Law

Court: Supreme CourtParty: Pro Se Litigant
Fine: 3000 ILS
14 December 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Husni Al Qawasmi Association et al. v. Ziad Oweisat (Sharfi) et al.

Pro Se Litigant appeared before the Supreme Court. Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Monetary Sanction.

Court: Supreme CourtParty: Pro Se Litigant
Fine: 500 ILS
3 December 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Cohen v. State of Israel et al.

Lawyer used Unidentified in proceedings before the Jerusalem District Court. Misrepresented: Exhibits & Submissions | Misrepresented exhibits Outcome: AI-generated materials disregarded; Adverse Costs Order; Order to correct filings..

Court: Jerusalem District CourtParty: LawyerTool: Unidentified
Fine: 4000 ILS
12 November 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

534246-07-22

Pro Se Litigant appeared before the . Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Monetary Sanction.

Party: Pro Se Litigant
Fine: 1000 ILS
2 November 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Wertheimer v. Ryanair DAC

Lawyer appeared before the Small Claims Court. Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Costs denied.

Court: Small Claims CourtParty: Lawyer
1 November 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Lugasi (Aklim Systems) v. Netivot Municipality

Pro Se Litigant used ChatGPT in proceedings before the Beersheba Magistrate's Court. Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Court noted party used GPT to generate material which included spurious/meaningless citation string presented as authority; court treated the AI‑produced material as unreliable and did not rely on it. Outcome: No reliance on hallucinated material.

Court: Beersheba Magistrate's CourtParty: Pro Se LitigantTool: ChatGPT
15 October 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Sonkin v. Roll Profile Ltd

Lawyer appeared before the Haifa Labour Court. Fabricated: Case Law | Twenty fabricated citations Outcome: Monetary Fine.

Court: Haifa Labour CourtParty: Lawyer
Fine: 2000 ILS
29 September 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Ilan Harush v. Roee Alfasi

Lawyer used Unidentified in proceedings before the Magistrate's Court, Rehovot. Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Disallowed Costs Order.

Court: Magistrate's Court, RehovotParty: LawyerTool: Unidentified
28 September 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Backhoe Center Ltd. v. Abu Gwaid

Lawyer appeared before the Beersheba Magistrate's Court. Fabricated: Case Law | The defendant's closing arguments contained nine citations to court rulings, none of which could be located in any legal database Outcome: Monetary penalty.

Court: Beersheba Magistrate's CourtParty: Lawyer
Fine: 7500 ILS
1 September 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Givati et al. v. Peri

Pro Se Litigant appeared before the Magistrate's Court Jaffa. Fabricated: Case Law | In a legal response, the complainant cited several legal precedents ("מובאות משפטיות") that could not be located in any official database Outcome: Corrections to filings ordered.

Court: Magistrate's Court JaffaParty: Pro Se Litigant
31 August 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Ploni v. Ashdod Port Company Ltd.

Pro Se Litigant appeared before the Beersheba Regional Labor Court. Outcome: Monetary Sanction, Adverse Costs Order.

Court: Beersheba Regional Labor CourtParty: Pro Se Litigant
Fine: 8000 ILS
17 August 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Meital Kasantini v. Hagiva'a Proyectim Handasiim Ltd

Lawyer used Unidentified in proceedings before the Ashdod Magistrate Court. Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff's statement of claim cited non-existent court decisions generated via AI; counsel admitted this and the court accepted the defendant's factual contention. Outcome: The court imposed a monetary penalty and dismissed the fabricated evidence..

Court: Ashdod Magistrate CourtParty: LawyerTool: Unidentified
Fine: 1000 ILS
12 August 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Gadban v. Israel Land Authority

Lawyer appeared before the D. Haifa. Fabricated: Case Law | over 30 judgments that were not located in the legal information systems

Court: D. HaifaParty: Lawyer
6 August 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Pinchas v. Supervisor of Insolvency

Pro Se Litigant used Unidentified in proceedings before the Jerusalem Magistrate's Court. Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Monetary sanction.

Court: Jerusalem Magistrate's CourtParty: Pro Se LitigantTool: Unidentified
Fine: 1000 ILS
3 August 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Shenaar v. The Quarries Rehabilitation Fund

Lawyer used Unidentified in proceedings before the Tel Aviv Labor Court. Fabricated: Case Law | Statement of claim relied on non-existent case law ('פסיקה בדויה'); the court found the sources do not exist and rejected the 'technical error' explanation. Outcome: Motion dismissed, ordered to pay opposing counsel's fees (6k) and fine (2k).

Court: Tel Aviv Labor CourtParty: LawyerTool: Unidentified
Fine: 8000 ILS
27 July 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Zlatin v. Assayag et al

Lawyer used Unidentified in proceedings before the Jerusalem Magistrate's Court. Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff's closing brief cited a non-existent appellate case; the court verified no such proceeding exists. Outcome: The court imposed a monetary penalty on the party responsible for the fabricated citations..

Court: Jerusalem Magistrate's CourtParty: LawyerTool: Unidentified
Fine: 25000 ILS
11 July 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Case No. 14748-08-21

Lawyer used Unidentified in proceedings before the Supreme Court. Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff’s counsel cited five Israeli Supreme Court decisions that do not exist in legal databases. Outcome: The court dismissed the fabricated evidence and imposed a fine..

Court: Supreme CourtParty: LawyerTool: Unidentified
Fine: 3000 ILS
9 July 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Plonit et al. v. The Administrator General in the Tel Aviv District et al.

Lawyer used Unidentified in proceedings before the Family Court in Petah Tikva. Fabricated: Case Law | Non-existent appellate case was cited to show executor's duty to avoid conflicts; court's database search found no such judgment. Outcome: Monetary Penalty.

Court: Family Court in Petah TikvaParty: LawyerTool: Unidentified
Fine: 7000 ILS
3 July 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Bucher v. Appeals Committee

Lawyer appeared before the Administrative Court. Fabricated: Case Law | In the response to the motion to dismiss, counsel cited non-existent court decisions purportedly sourced via AI; the court viewed this gravely but imposed no costs after counsel accepted responsibility and apologized. Outcome: Monetary penalty imposed.

Court: Administrative CourtParty: Lawyer
2 July 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Case No. 525309-08-22

Lawyer appeared before the Jerusalem Enforcement and Collection Authority. Fabricated: Legal Norm | Counsel quoted and relied on a non-existent subsection 66א(א1) purportedly barring exit bans below 40,000 NIS absent special reasons; the Court could not locate such subsection or text. Outcome: Warning.

Court: Jerusalem Enforcement and Collection AuthorityParty: Lawyer
30 June 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Auto Test Ltd. v. Ministry of Transport

Lawyer appeared before the Tel Aviv-Yafo District Court. Misrepresented: Case Law | Petition and supplemental filing contained numerous incorrect case citations (wrong decisions) linked to AI use; court deemed this improper and denied petitioner costs. Outcome: Motion for Costs denied.

Court: Tel Aviv-Yafo District CourtParty: Lawyer
25 June 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Chen v. Vana et al.

Lawyer used Unidentified in proceedings before the Haifa Magistrate's Court. Fabricated: Case Law | Authorities cited in section 28 of the appeal were nonexistent; the trustee noted they do not appear in Nevo, the Court independently failed to locate them, ordered production, and the appellant admitted they were AI-generated. The Court noted SC guidance that such use can ... Outcome: Appeal was ultimately dismissed on merits; Monetary sanction.

Court: Haifa Magistrate's CourtParty: LawyerTool: Unidentified
Fine: 3000 ILS
8 June 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Ploni v. Wasserman et al.

Pro Se Litigant used ChatGPT; Google Search in proceedings before the Small Claims Court. Outcome: Monetary Fine.

Court: Small Claims CourtParty: Pro Se LitigantTool: ChatGPT; Google Search
Fine: 250 ILS
1 June 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

So-and-so v. v. Anonymous

Lawyer appeared before the Israel. Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant cited non-existent case law; the court found some referenced judgments "do not exist at all" and warned about uncontrolled AI use. Outcome: AI use was noted by the lower court; no specific sanction for it.

Court: IsraelParty: Lawyer
26 May 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Vechtel et al. v. Gershoni

Pro Se Litigant appeared before the Israel. False Quotes: Case Law | The motion included a purported quote from a judgment authored by the presiding judge; the court states that quote does not appear in that judgment. Outcome: Motion denied.

Court: IsraelParty: Pro Se Litigant
25 May 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Ehrlich v. Israel National Academy of Sciences et al.

Pro Se Litigant used Unidentified in proceedings before the Israel. Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant's filing included many purported 'judgments' that never existed; the Court identified these as AI-generated fabrications and treated the erroneous citations as grounds to deny relief and impose costs. Outcome: Request dismissed on the merits, monetary sanction.

Court: IsraelParty: Pro Se LitigantTool: Unidentified
Fine: 500 ILS
18 May 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Fox v. Assum

Lawyer used Unidentified in proceedings before the Israel. Fabricated: Case Law | Defendant cited particulars of an apparently non-existent ('imaginary') judgment; the court said it was not just a wrong case or party names, suspected AI use, and demanded a clearer explanation. Outcome: No formal sanction; request by court for explanation; partial costs awarded against the defendant.

Court: IsraelParty: LawyerTool: Unidentified
Fine: 1200 ILS
14 May 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Case No. 72079-11-24

Lawyer used Unidentified in proceedings before the Israel. Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff's counsel cited non-existent case law in the 6.5.2025 reply; the court could not locate the citations and counsel admitted on 7.5.2025 they were invented due to a mistakenly filed draft. Outcome: No immediate sanction imposed; the matter was referred to the Legal Department of the Court Administration for review and potential action, including referral to the Ethics Committee of the Israel Bar Association.

Court: IsraelParty: LawyerTool: Unidentified
⚠ Professional sanction imposed
12 May 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available
Court Case✓ Official

Israel v. Ibrahim Mahajneh

Prosecutor used Unidentified in proceedings before the Israel. Fabricated: Legal Norm | State relied on s.23(a) of a purported 'Criminal Procedure (Enforcement Powers, Search and Seizure in Computer) Law, 1996' to define 'institutional computer'; the court found no such law exists (AI-generated) and the state admitted the mistake at the hearing. Outcome: No sanction imposed; judge criticized the error as a “disgrace”; granted partial relief to applicant.

Court: IsraelParty: ProsecutorTool: Unidentified
7 May 2025Judicial & Law EnforcementGenerative AILiability & Accountability
↗ Link available