Court ruling8/7/2026

Supreme Court Sets Guidelines for Government Authorities’ Use of Artificial Intelligence

The Supreme Court granted the appeal of the father of a student in special education and ordered the Ramat Gan Municipality to pay NIS 30,000 in legal costs. This followed unverified references to fabricated court rulings and a Director General’s circular, which were used both in the response to the resident and before the court.

Key facts

•Case: עע״מ 63194-08-25
•Court: Supreme Court of Israel
•Article published: 23.03.2026
•Respondent: Ramat Gan Municipality
•Costs: NIS 30,000
•The judgment was issued unanimously by three justices

The Dispute Over the Student’s Transportation

After moving to a new home, the father of a student in special education asked the municipality to arrange transportation for his son from the new home to the educational institution. The municipality refused, relying on a certain Director General’s circular and on “recent case law.” After the father petitioned the court, the parties agreed to provide transportation “as an exception to the rule,” but his request to order the municipality to pay legal costs was denied.

Why the Case Reached the Supreme Court

The father appealed the decision denying costs, arguing that the municipality had relied on fabricated court rulings, giving rise to an inference that artificial intelligence had been used improperly. The municipality argued that its position rested on a solid foundation despite some erroneous references, and that the transportation entitlement had been granted due to an exceptional decision.

The Court’s Position

Supreme Court Deputy President Noam Sohlberg, with the concurrence of Justices Ofer Grosskopf and Gila Canfy-Steinitz, held that the municipality’s decisions and legal documents contained numerous erroneous references and quotations, some of which were fabricated. The court viewed this as a serious misleading of the court and the opposing party, an abuse of judicial proceedings, and a violation of a specific procedural duty not to submit unreliable documents. Particular emphasis was placed on the heightened seriousness of such an error in the relationship between an authority and a resident, who may not know that the decision is based on false materials.

Artificial Intelligence Is Not Prohibited, but It Requires Verification

The court emphasized that the violation does not lie in the use of artificial intelligence itself, but in using its outputs without proper examination and verification of their reliability. The appeal was granted, and the municipality was ordered to pay enhanced legal costs of NIS 30,000 for the proceedings before both judicial instances.

What this means for you

Government and municipal authorities may use artificial intelligence tools, but they are required to examine the references, quotations, and legal grounds generated by those tools. If unverified materials affect a decision concerning a resident’s request or are included in legal documents, this may be deemed an abuse of proceedings and result in an award of enhanced costs.

Find a lawyer for this topic

Case analysis based on court rulings