A defamation lawsuit for racism – what to write to win?

Our firm filed a defamation lawsuit for racism on behalf of our firm's client who was publicly humiliated in a Facebook group with tens of thousands of members, and solely because our firm's client was not Jewish.

within Claim Defamation for racism It is very important to detail the exact statements published by the offender, as failure to state the exact statements (preferably through a quote) may lead toDismissal of the lawsuit outright. 

Before filing a defamation lawsuit for racism It is recommended to contact the defendant via Warning letter before filing a claim And demand financial compensation and the deletion of the post or comment that, in your opinion, constitutes defamation.

If the defendant does not respond to your claim or responds to your claim and rejects it, this may greatly assist in the legal process, and may even lead to the financial compensation awarded in your favor being much higher.

It is highly recommended to use the services of Defamation lawyer Experienced because cases of this type may seem simple, but in practice it is very important to know the relevant legislation and case law, in order to significantly increase the chances of winning in court a significant amount of compensation.

Defamation lawsuit for racism

Regarding:

The plaintiffs:

1. שם ושם משפחה, ת"ז:________
2. שם ושם משפחה, ת"ז: _________
____________ Street 
Tel: ___________
ע"י ב"כ עוה"ד אדי בליטשטיין (מ.ר. 60023)
13 HaHagana St., Rishon LeZion (Yaron Miller Tower, Office 501) 
Tel: 03-6427876; Fax: 077-4704697

N G D

The defendant:

שם ושם משפחה, ת"ז: ___________
_________ Street
City ____________ 

Claim

Essence of the claim:  slander. 
Requested remedies: Monetary compensation of ________ NIS, an order ordering the publication of a denial of the offensive publications. 
amount Court fee: ________ ש"ח (________ ש"ח במועד זה לפי תקנה 6(א) ופרט 1 לתקנות בתי המשפט (אגרות), תשס"ז -2007).
The existence of an additional procedure: As far as the plaintiffs know, there is no further proceeding in court regarding that factual tract.

Summons

Since the plaintiffs have filed this lawsuit against you, you are invited to file Defense within 60 days From the date this invitation was presented to you.

Please note, if you do not submit Defense אזי לפי תקנה 130 לתקנות סדר הדין האזרחי, התשע"ט-2018, תהיה לתובעות הזכות לקבל A verdict not before you. 

All emphasis in the statement of claim is not in the original unless otherwise noted.

A concise description of the litigants

1. The plaintiffs are ______. Plaintiff 1 is ___________.
2. Plaintiff 2 is _____, committed _________ (the relevance of this detail will become clear later).
3. The defendant was a client of plaintiff 1 several years ago.

The relief sought in summary

• The Honorable Court is hereby requested to grant each of the plaintiffs the following reliefs:
• פיצוי כספי בסך ______ ₪ (ובמצטבר פיצוי כולל בסך ______ אלף ש"ח).
• An order ordering the defendant to publish in the Facebook group that is the subject of this lawsuit a denial of her offensive publications (by virtue of Section 9(a)(2) of the Defamation Law).

Summary of the facts necessary to establish the cause of action and when it arose

• The defendant published defamatory statements on _____, which constitute defamation and a violation of privacy with respect to the plaintiffs.
• הודעות אלה פורסמו בקבוצת פייסבוק בשם "_____", With almost 95 thousand members. 
• Among other things, the defendant wrote that Plaintiff 1 and her children (including Plaintiff 2) are _______, that the plaintiff and her children are _______, that the plaintiff demanded that she transfer __________ to her.
• In relation to Plaintiff 2, Defendant wrote, inter alia, ______________
• All of these and other racist allegations on behalf of the defendant are discussed in detail below.
• Plaintiff 1 spoke with Defendant by telephone and asked her to delete these offensive publications, but Defendant did not agree to this.

The facts that give the court jurisdiction

1. לבית המשפט הנכבד הסמכות העניינית והמקומית לדון בתביעה זו לאור סכום התביעה ומקום מגורי הנתבעת, בהתאם לתקנה 7(א) תקנות סדר הדין האזרחי, תשע"ט – 2018.

Details of the allegations

1. Plaintiff 1 is _____ who receives her clients _______. Until several years ago, Defendant was a regular customer of Plaintiff 1.
2. The defendant was a problematic customer who determined _________, which caused plaintiff 1 financial damages. The plaintiff is _______.
3. In one of the cases where the defendant did arrive at ______, plaintiff 1 stated to her that it was unacceptable that she was setting ______, and that next time she would have to pay for _____. Immediately afterwards, the defendant began to shout at plaintiff 1, and therefore plaintiff 1 asked the defendant to leave _____. Plaintiff 1's daughter, plaintiff 2, witnessed the defendant's shouting.
4. Several years later, on ______, another client of Plaintiff 1 posted a very positive review of her on the _____ City Residents Forum on Facebook. This group has almost 95,000 members.

attache 1: The screenshot indicates the number of members in the Facebook group in which the defendant posted defamatory statements.

1. As part of this review, Plaintiff 1's client praised her highly, mentioned Plaintiff 1's _____, gave her name, and provided her phone number.
2. on Positive review It was the defendant who decided to respond and tell what she claimed happened. Before ______, and to add to that harsh, racist and false statements. Racist statements that if they had been made about Jews would certainly have been labeled as anti-Semitic. The defendant's response received many likes.

attache 2: The positive criticism of Plaintiff 1 and the defendant's response.

1. If the defendant's response had been limited to the first 4 lines, it is doubtful that this lawsuit would have been filed, but the defendant decided to add false and racist statements. Among other things, the defendant wrote the following:

______________

1. This is the fruit of the defendant's sick mind.
2. The defendant was not satisfied with this, and decided to present her racist views as well. Among other things, she wrote in the same response:

__________________

• לקרוא ולא להאמין שאמירות כאלה נכתבות בפומבי בשנת ______, וללא כל בושה. ניכר מהכתוב שהנתבעת מתגאה, כך ממש, בדעותיה והיא רואה "חובה מוסרית" להביע אותן בפומבי. אבסורד במיטבו.
• For the sake of good order, the plaintiffs are lawfully residing in _____. They are not __________.
• As can be seen from the review written by Plaintiff 1's customer, Plaintiff 1 is _________, through hard work.
• Reference to plaintiff 1 _____, but in double quotation marks (twice), indicates that the defendant's intention was to say the exact opposite about the plaintiff.
• At the end of the response, the defendant even bothered to state the plaintiffs' address to ensure that people knew exactly who they were talking about.
• Plaintiff 2 is a _____ who went through _____, and is currently _____ for all intents and purposes.

Appendix 3: Documents indicating that plaintiff 2 ______.

• התובעת 1 מעולם לא דיברה אל הנתבעת "בצורה _____". די באמירה זו, כשלעצמה, על מנת לפגוע בפרנסתה של התובעת 1. מי יסכים להגיע ________, והדבר הוא כמובן שקר וכזב.
• There is no doubt that if a post of this type were written about all Jews, without exception, it would be considered an anti-Semitic post.
• The defendant did not stop with these harsh statements. When Plaintiff 1's daughter, Plaintiff 2, came to the defense of her mother (Plaintiff 1), the defendant wrote to her, among other things, as follows:

________________

• התייחסות אל תובעת 2 _________ מהווה לשון הרע (ראו לדוגמה: ע"א 11062/07 Sultan Zion v. Luke David (25.12.2007); ת"א 24312-01-21 ח"כ מיקי זוהר נ' עמותת חוזה חדש (פורסם בנבו, 23.3.2022; סעיף 88 במסגרת ת"א 54456-03-18 עמרי ליפשיץ נ' משה מנור (פורסם בנבו, 6.9.2020)).
• The defendant also treated the plaintiffs with contemptuous behavior. This matter also constitutes defamation.
• The defendant also wrote to plaintiff 2 as follows:

_____________

Appendix 4: Plaintiff 2's response and the defendant's responses in relation to Plaintiff 2.

• Plaintiff 2 never attempted ________, Plaintiff 2 did not undergo a fictitious _____, and Plaintiff 2 is certainly not ________ (or at all). Even the repeated reference to Plaintiff 2 ___________ is intended to humiliate and belittle her in the eyes of the public.
• The defendant continued to write more and more offensive statements that constitute defamation. For example, the defendant wrote in response to a response from plaintiff 1:

______________

• To this, Plaintiff 1 responded that she wished the Defendant only health and livelihood.
• The defendant continued to write her lies to other people as well. For example, in response to Ms. ________'s comment:

_____________

• Further to that correspondence with Ms. _______, after Ms. _______ expressed shock at the defendant's words, the defendant wrote as follows:

______________

• Other people responded to the defendant's responses, and some expressed shock at her words. This did not cause the defendant to retract her statements; on the contrary, she repeated her racist manifesto.

Appendix 5: Comments from other people.

• Following the defendant's responses, another client of plaintiff 1 named _______ sent her a WhatsApp message with screenshots of the defendant's responses.

Appendix 6: Screenshots of WhatsApp messages that the plaintiff received from another customer regarding the defendant's responses.

• Plaintiff 1's customer emphasized in the WhatsApp message that she reported the defendant's offensive response. From this message we learn that other customers of Plaintiff 1 also identified exactly who the defendant was referring to and that the content of the defendant's messages was perceived as offensive content.
• Plaintiff 1 called Defendant shortly after discovering Defendant's comments, and asked her to delete them. Defendant demanded Plaintiff 1 not to call and harass her, and in any case Defendant did not delete what she had written.
• Under these circumstances, it is clear that this claim is justified, and the defendant should be ordered to pay significant compensation.

The legal argument

slander

• תוכן תגובתיה של הנתבעת נכנס בגדר "לשון הרע" כהגדרתה בחוק איסור לשון הרע, תשכ"ה – 1965.
• The Supreme Court recognized the importance of a person's good name:

"הדינים בדבר איסור לשון הרע מהווים איזון עדין בין זכויות אדם מרכזיות בכל משטר דמוקרטי: הזכות לשם הטוב ולפרטיות מזה והזכות לחופש הביטוי מזה. A freedom-loving society cannot be maintained without protecting the good name of each member of society. (ראו ע"א 214/89 אבנרי נ' שפירא (להלן – פרשת אבנרי [1]), בעמ' 856). עמדתי על כך באחת הפרשות, בצייני:

"הגוזל את רכושי עשוי לפצות אותי בממון. הגוזל את שמי הטוב גוזל את טעם קיומי. שמו הטוב של האדם קובע את התייחסותו שלו לעצמו ואת ההתייחסות של חבריו אליו. הוא קובע את יחסה של החברה אליו. הנכס היחיד שיש לרבים – בין המכהנים ברשויות השלטון ובין הפועלים במגזר הפרטי – הוא שמם הטוב. הוא יקר להם כחיים עצמם" (בג"ץ 6126/94 סנש נ' רשות השידור (להלן – פרשת סנש [2]), בעמ' 832)."

See: רע"א 4740/00 Limor Amer et al. v. Orna Yosef et al. (Published in Nevo, 14.8.2001)

• Section 7A(b) of this law allows compensation to be claimed without proof of damage. For each advertisement Which constitutes defamation in an amount exceeding, as of today, 73,000 NIS.
• Section 7A(c) of this law allows compensation to be claimed without proof of damage. For each advertisement which constitutes slander, published Intentionally to harm, In an amount that currently exceeds 146,000 NIS.
• לשיטת התובעות פרסומיה של הנתבעת נעשו מתוך כוונה לפגוע ומשכך כל אחת מהתובעות זכאית לסך של 146 אלף ש"ח.
• לחלופין, היה ובית המשפט יקבע כי אין בתגובותיה של הנתבעת כוונה לפגוע, הרי שמבוקש לפסוק פיצוי כספי בסך 73 אלף ש"ח ₪ לכל אחת מהתובעות.
• In light of the large number of various publications, and in light of the fact that the defendant repeatedly repeated and echoed her lies, it appears that the plaintiffs' claim is at the low end.

Compensation for general damage (in addition to statutory compensation)

• The defendant's responses are highly virulent, racist, and offensive, both in relation to plaintiff 1 and plaintiff 2, especially when the original post by plaintiff 1's client was intended to praise her. And help her _____ in a difficult time. 
• The defendant's responses caused the plaintiffs great shame, suffering, and anguish. The harsh statements deeply humiliated them, especially in light of the fact that they are both law-abiding citizens (plaintiff 2 is ______) who did nothing to harm Jews or non-Jews.
• The Supreme Court recognized compensation for general damages In addition On the statutory compensation provided for in the Defamation Law. In this matter, it was determined, inter alia, as follows:
• "ראשית, טוען ברק כי משקבע בית המשפט המחוזי שהנזקים הספציפיים שאליהם טען אלון לא הוּכחו – הרי שהפיצויים שנפסקו הם פיצויים סטטוטוריים ללא הוכחת נזק, מכוח סעיף 7א לחוק. טענה זו – בטעות יסודהThe court did determine that Qallon had not proven specific harm, but it also accepted his claim for general harm..  Note: Compensation for general damage is not the same as compensation without proof of damage. This is compensation for damages that occurred and were proven – despite being intangible. Therefore, the claim that compensation for this damage is limited to a sum of 50,000 NIS cannot be accepted, nor can the claim that Alon did not claim compensation at all by virtue of Section 7A."

See: ע"א 3858/20 Barak Haim Cohen v. Alon Hamdani (Published in Nevo, June 15, 2022).

• כל אחת מהתובעות מעמידה את גובה הפיצוי הנדרש בגין נזק כללי על סך 75 אלף ₪ (150 אלף ש"ח לשתיהן).

Invasion of privacy

• The defendant decided to publicly disclose that the plaintiffs are not _____. It is not clear why this was necessary. With respect to plaintiff 2, this information is incorrect.
• סעיף 2 לחוק הגנת הפרטיות, תשמ"א – 1981 קובע כי פגיעה בפרטיות היא בין היתר:

"(7) הפרה של חובת סודיות שנקבעה בדין לגבי עניניו הפרטיים של אדם;

(9) Using information about a person's private affairs or disclosing it to another, other than for the purpose for which it was disclosed;

(11) Publication of A matter concerning the privacy of a person's personal life, לרבות עברו המיני, או למצב בריאותו, או להתנהגותו ברשות היחיד."

• In accordance with the legal provisions mentioned above, the mere fact that the defendant publicly revealed (repeatedly) that the plaintiffs are not _____ constitutes an invasion of privacy. It should be emphasized that the defendant could have conveyed the (racist) message even without stating that the plaintiffs are not ______ (as mentioned, this is not at all true in the case of plaintiff 2).
• בהתאם להוראות סעיף 29א(2) כל אחת מהתובעות זכאית לקבל פיצוי מהנתבעת על סך 100 אלף ש"ח (בפועל התובעות זכאיות לקבל סכום גבוה יותר לאור מנגנון ההצמדה הקבוע בסעיף 29א(ד) לחוק), שכן, פרסומי הנתבעת נועדו על מנת לפגוע בהן, ובמיוחד בפרנסת התובעת 1.
• אם בית המשפט לא יקבל את הטענה שפרסומי הנתבעת בוצעו בכוונה לפגוע, הרי שיש לפסוק לטובת כל אחת מהתובעת לפחות סך של 50 אלף ש"ח, בהתאם להוראות סעיף 29א(ב)(1) לחוק.

In conclusion

• In light of all of the above, the Honorable Court is hereby requested to summon the defendant to a hearing before it and to rule as follows:
• the remedies detailed in this statement of claim. מטעמי אגרה בלבד התובעות מעמידות את סכום הפיצוי הנדרש על סך _____ אלף ש"ח לשתיהן.
• לחייב את הנתבעת בתשלום הוצאות משפט ושכר טרחת עו"ד בתוספת מע"מ.
• To grant any other relief that the Honorable Court deems appropriate in the circumstances of the case.

_______________
עו"ד אדי בליטשטיין
ב"כ התובעות