Defamation6 min read7/29/2026

A Facebook Post Worth 70,000 Shekels: When Is It Considered Defamation in Israel?

An offensive post may result in compensation amounting to tens of thousands of shekels, even if the plaintiff did not prove the loss of customers or salary. But 70,000 shekels is not awarded automatically: the court examines the meaning of the post, the extent of its distribution, the evidence, the writer’s intent, and the defenses provided by law.

Numbers and facts

•Up to approximately ₪80,000 without proof of damage
•Up to approximately ₪160,000 where there is intent to cause harm
•₪33,500 for a series of offensive posts
•₪30,000 in compensation and ₪10,000 in costs in the restaurant case
•Up to ₪39,900 — the small-claims ceiling as of January 2026

Not Every Rude Remark Is Defamation

The Prohibition of Defamation Law, 1965 covers publications capable of humiliating a person, making them an object of hatred or ridicule, or harming their work, profession, or position. It may be a post, image, video clip, message in a WhatsApp group, or even an oral statement heard by at least one person other than the injured party. The court applies an objective test: what matters is not only that the plaintiff felt offended, but also how a reasonable reader would have understood the words in those circumstances. Therefore, harsh criticism, an unwelcome opinion, or an ordinary insult does not always provide grounds for a claim.

Why Proof of Financial Loss Is Not Required

Section 7A of the Prohibition of Defamation Law allows an award, without proof of damage, of up to approximately 80,000 shekels per publication. If actual intent to cause harm is proven, compensation may reach approximately 160,000 shekels. These are maximum limits, not a fixed tariff; the court may award only part of the amount. It evaluates the severity of the allegations, the humiliation, the extent of distribution, the parties’ conduct, removal of the post, and a public apology.

How Actual Cases Translate Into Amounts

The Tel Aviv Small Claims Court awarded 33,500 shekels for a series of posts in which a person was described, among other things, as homeless, mentally ill, and the target of bullying. In another dispute, the Magistrate’s Court initially awarded a restaurant owner 5,000 shekels, but the District Court increased the compensation to 30,000 shekels and added 10,000 shekels in legal costs; the post was deemed false, malicious, and to include a racist remark. In Case No. 24904-05-21, 90,000 shekels was awarded for defamatory posts and the creation of a bullying website. These judgments illustrate why a post may cost 30,000 or 70,000 shekels or more: the content, repetition, audience, and proven intent to cause harm become decisive factors.

Sharing Is More Serious Than Liking

In Case No. 1239/19, the Israeli Supreme Court distinguished between two familiar Facebook buttons. Sharing constitutes active publication of the material to a new audience and may itself be considered an independent publication of defamation. An ordinary like, however, generally does not meet this condition. At the same time, several similar posts by one writer do not necessarily entitle the plaintiff to multiple maximum compensation awards; in Case No. 2855/20, the Supreme Court clarified that the court must determine whether they are independent publications or one continuing story.

When the Court Dismisses the Claim

A claim may be dismissed if the post, objectively, has no defamatory meaning, or if the plaintiff did not preserve evidence of the text itself and its distribution. The defendant may also be protected by the truth of the publication combined with a public interest under Section 14, good faith under Section 15, or the publication’s status as a permitted publication under Section 13 of the Prohibition of Defamation Law. Merely saying “this is true” is not enough; the relevant defense requires both truthfulness and public interest. On the other hand, the phrase “this is my opinion” does not turn a false factual allegation into a protected assessment.

A Screenshot Is More Important Than a Retelling

A common mistake by the injured party is to enter into a public argument without preserving the original post, the writer’s name, the date, the comments, the likes, and the shares. If the post is deleted, proving the exact wording and extent of distribution becomes much more difficult. The choice of court depends on the amount and context: the Small Claims Court hears claims of up to 39,900 shekels as of January 2026, the Magistrate’s Court hears claims of up to 2.5 million shekels, and the District Court hears claims above that amount. The Regional Labor Court hears disputes directly related to employment relationships, while the Family Court hears family disputes where the appropriate connection exists.

FAQ

Can a claim succeed if the post caused no proven financial harm?

Yes. Section 7A allows compensation to be claimed without proving loss of income, customers, or work. However, the plaintiff must still prove publication, its defamatory nature, and that no defense applies.

How much is awarded for a single defamatory Facebook post?

There is no fixed price; the law sets only the maximum compensation without proof of damage. In practice, the amount depends on the severity of the allegation, the audience, repetition of the publication, the writer’s intent, removal of the post, and apologies.

Can a claim be filed over sharing defamation written by someone else?

Yes. In Case No. 1239/19, the Supreme Court held that sharing may become an independent publication because it expands the circle of readers. A like, however, is generally not considered a publication.

Does the truth always protect the writer of the post?

No. The defense under Section 14 requires both the truth of the publication and the existence of a public interest. If the writer disclosed true private information merely to humiliate, this defense may not succeed.

What should be preserved before the post is deleted?

Complete screenshots containing the text, the writer’s name, the date, the comments, and the number of reactions and shares must be preserved. It is also useful to save the link and the sequence of posts, rather than relying only on a cropped image of a single phrase.

What to do next

First, preserve the entire post and separately save data showing the extent of its distribution. Then verify the exact wording, possible evidence of its truth, the public interest, and the writer’s subsequent conduct. The size of the potential claim and the dispute’s connection to employment or family matters will determine the judicial forum to approach.