What is a gag order?
תביעת השתקה (או באנגלית SLAPP: Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) היא תביעה כנגד נתבע אותו מעוניינים "להשתיק". כלומר, באמצעות הליך משפטי, שמטרתו להתיש ולהפחיד את היריב (משום שתביעות השתקה מוגשות בדרך כלל עם דרישה לפיצוי כספי גבוה מאוד), גורמים ליריב לוותר על הביקורת הציבורית שהעביר בפומבי כנגד התובע, ולעיתים אף נאלצים לחזור מהביקורת ולפרסם התנצלות.
A gag order is usually filed by a financially strong entity against a weak defendant. That strong entity can finance a legal proceeding, which may last a long time, with one goal in mind - to make the defendant, who cannot afford the legal expenses, withdraw.
Characteristics of a silencing claim
ההלכה שנקבעה על ידי בית המשפט העליון בעניין תביעת השתקה, במסגרת רע"א 1954/24 נתנאל וקנין נ' קיבוץ ניר דוד – אגודה שיתופית, קבעה את המאפיינים של תביעת השתקה:
- Power imbalances between the parties.
- A groundless or borderline cause of action.
- Excessive and baseless compensation claim.
- Problematic and unjustified choice of defendants.
- A lawsuit filed for statements made in the context of a debate and discussion on a subject that may arouse public interest.
- The entirety of the plaintiff's conduct.
What is the position of the courts on silencing claims?
תביעת השתקה מעניינת התבררה בבית משפט השלום בפתח תקווה (ת"א 12217-12-16 בוגבו ישראל בע"מ נ' רבקה שמס).
התובעת היא חברה המייבאת מוצרי תינוקות יוקרתיים, וביניהם מוצר שנקרא "בייביביורן" (מנשא תינוקות). הנתבעת היא אם לתשעה ילדים אשר הקימה קבוצת פייסבוק שעסקה במוצרים לתינוקות בה היא העניקה יעוץ ללא תשלום בעניין מנשאי תינוקות. הנתבעת ייעצה לפונים לא לקנות את המוצר "בייביביורן" וכתבה, בין היתר, כך:
"BabyBjorn is not recommended for any age., And in almost all backpacks such as Ergo, it is better not to use it before six months.".
"Also in terms of support for the parents' backs, their carriers are far from comfortable in the long term.".
"BabyBjorn, as we have already mentioned here, is not recommended for any age.".
"BabyBjorn also presents it as a carrier from birth, in fact it is a carrier that even at an age 8-9 months I don't think a child would enjoy sitting in it".
"Babybjorn may be trendy, But it is definitely not an ergonomic carrier., It does not support either the baby or the parent well.".
The plaintiff saw these things Defamatory advertising והגישה נגד הנתבעת תביעה על סך 300,000 ש"ח (כאשר לפני הגשת התביעה, במסגרת מכתב ההתראה, נדרש פיצוי בסך 1.8 מיליון ש"ח).
The court's decision: This is a claim for silence and should be dismissed out of hand (and the plaintiff be ordered to pay legal costs).
In determining that this is indeed a classic gagging claim, the court ruled, among other things, as follows:
בע"א 15267-09-17 Serena v. Netanyahu [Published in Nevo] She noted 22The judge Abigail Cohen (district T"א) כי Claims SLAPP characterized by the fact that the economic power imbalances between the parties are prominent, the claims Submitted in an excessive amount that has no basis in law or case lawand include Factual and legal frivolous claims, intended To exhaust the opponent by having to deal with them, without Importance of the final outcome in a trial.
Submission This type of lawsuit sends a signal to anyone who wants to express opinions in the public sphere about that product or business., because They'd better hold their tongues or their pens., perhaps They will swallow it and snatch it from their hands. "ענק" ושכירי His swordOn the way This is what those with economic power want., and succeed often, prevent Public criticism of the quality of the service or product they provide (דו"ח The Association for Civil Rights "משתיק Legal Voice: Defamation as a Threat to Freedom of Expression", פורסם On the association's website).
…
לאחר ששקלתי את טענות הצדדים ואת המבחנים שנקבעו בפסיקה לתביעות השתקה, אני סבורה כי התביעה שבפני עונה על כל הפרמטרים ל"תביעת השתקה", וזאת על בסיס העובדות שמפורטות בכתבי הטענות עצמם ואינן שנויות במחלוקת.
…
I agree, with all due respect, with the determination of Honorable Justice Shevah, that in claims that are clear estoppel claims, the court is authorized to dismiss the claims outright, and is not limited to granting a limited and partial relief of an award of costs at the end of the proceedings.
A gag order is a claim that is contrary to the public interest in maintaining free, critical, and open discourse in the public sphere in general, and on social media in particular, about products and services offered to the public. Such a claim also constitutes an abuse of the courts, whose time is a public resource that must be used wisely and not allowed to be used as a tool by the wealthy to exploit those with limited economic resources.
All the parameters regarding the power gap between the parties, filing a claim for an amount that has no basis in legal reality, the lack of a reasonable legal and factual basis, and a clear tendency to silence the expression of a critical opinion - are clearly present here.
The defendant's statements do not go beyond expressing a personal opinion, that the carriers are of the type marketed by the plaintiff (and not necessarily those in particular, whose name is mentioned only as an example or in response to a specific question about them, but כל המנשאים הקשיחים ה"מערביים") are not comfortable for the baby or are not recommended.
There is no statement in the advertisements that attributes any health harm to the baby or parent to these products, there is no false factual statement contained therein, and the issue of comfort for the baby and the parent, as well as the worldview regarding what is desirable and contributes to the baby's development and well-being, is clearly a matter of opinion. The defendant does not present herself as a medical expert or an impartial advisor, but rather openly and declaredly, as supporting the use of cloth carriers, according to the method she learned in her training.
Similar to the plaintiff's small group of participants, there are other groups on Facebook that have titles related to ergonomic carriers, and they also maintain that ergonomic carriers without a rigid structure are preferable for the baby's health and well-being.
The plaintiff's claim is comparable to the claim of a meat product manufacturer who claims that Facebook groups that advocate veganism or vegetarianism, encourage the adoption of this lifestyle and believe that eating meat is harmful to health, publish defamatory statements about its products.
This is a dedicated group that the defendant has championed, which supports unintelligible canvas carriers, and any reasonable person who reads the publications posted in the group knows that this is a group with a specific orientation. רשאי הגולש לבחור בין ההשקפות המובעות בקבוצה זו לבין פרסומים בקבוצות אחרות בנושא מנשאים, או במאמרים המתפרסמים באתרים שונים באינטרנט (לרבות מאמרים בעלי עמדות אחרות, אליהם הפנתה הנתבעת עצמה את הפונים!), או בייעוץ של מומחים לדבר – המידע בעולם החופשי זורם מכיוונים שונים ומגוונים, הדעות וההמלצות עומדות לעתים קרובות בסתירה זו לזו, והצרכן/הגולש יקרא, יתרשם ויבחר כראות עיניו, בבחינת "עשה לך רב".
ההתבטאויות נשוא התביעה הן מתונות ואין בהן משום "השמצה", מדובר כאמור בקבוצה בעלת מספר מצומצם של חברים/עוקבים, ולא בכדי לא היה בידי התובעת להצביע ולו לכאורה על תהודה ציבורית או נזק שנגרמו לה עקב הפרסומים נשוא התביעה.
Therefore, I determine that this is a vexatious and vexatious lawsuit, which is also without cause. Even if the plaintiff proves all the publications cited in the lawsuit, she will not be able to obtain the relief sought. Therefore, and in accordance with the law and case law, the lawsuit should be ordered to be dismissed outright.
בית המשפט חייב את התובעת בהוצאות משפט בסך 15,000 ש"ח.
Dismissal of a claim for silence and charging the plaintiff with deterrent legal costs
בית המשפט נתן פסק דין חדשני בסוגיית תביעות השתקה, לפיו במקרים מתאימים יש מקום להורות על סילוק על הסף של תביעת השתקה וחיובו של התובע בהוצאות משפט מרתיעות בגובה מאה אלף ש"ח (ת"א 5223-11-17 גילי עזריה נ' יוסי ניסן).
At the end of the judgment, the court ruled as follows:
Therefore, I order the dismissal of the claim outright. The plaintiffs will pay the defendant the costs of the claim in the amount of 100,000 NIS.
Frequently Asked Questions Regarding a Silence Claim
-
Is every defamation lawsuit a lawsuit for silence?
No. A gag order is a claim with unique characteristics (which have been determined in court rulings). Read this article in its entirety to learn about these unique characteristics.
-
How much compensation can I receive if a lawsuit against me is dismissed?
In July 2021, the court determined that there was a case for awarding legal costs of one hundred thousand shekels when rejecting a gag order.
-
How much does it cost to defend against a gag order?
There is no uniform price list. Each silence claim is examined on its own merits and the price quote for handling the claim is given based on the complexity of the claim.
-
Will a gagging claim always be rejected outright?
No. A motion to suppress can be dismissed even at the conclusion of the proceedings. Needless to say, a court can also accept a motion to suppress.
