It was further argued that this was not a case of enrichment and not a trial because the defendants did not have any benefit and they did not become rich following the publication of the plaintiff's photo.
This is a petty lawsuit that constitutes an abuse of legal proceedings, and in the framework of it, unfounded and excessive remedies were requested. Therefore, defendants 1 and 3 sought to order the dismissal of the claim and to impose real expenses on the plaintiff.
- The Ottoman Settlement [Old Version] 1916According to defendant 2, it acted on behalf of defendants 1 and 3 in order to re-upload the website, in which the alleged wrongs were allegedly committed.
12-34-56-78 Chekhov v. State of Israel, P.D. 51 (2)The involvement of defendant No. 2, who carried out temporary accidental copying as defined in the Copyright Law, was technical. She did not know and should not have known that the use made by defendants 1 and 3 of the photograph that is the subject of the action was prohibited and/or unauthorized. At most, defendant 2 acted as an extension of defendant 3 and therefore, there is no rivalry between it and the plaintiff.
She further claimed that the alleged publication was a minimally sized photograph that appeared on the website for a short period of time, and therefore, the plaintiff was not harmed as a result of the alleged publication and her privacy was not violated.
Moreover, defendant 2 claimed that the plaintiff was not libeled, the plaintiff has no copyright in the photograph that is the subject of the lawsuit, and defendant 2's involvement does not give rise to a cause of action under the Enrichment Law, nor in the trial. Therefore, the lawsuit against her should be dismissed, while charging the plaintiff her legal expenses and attorney's fees plus VAT, and to obligate, at most, defendants 1 and 3, who were responsible for the content of the website for whom she was asked to design.
- In a hearing held on October 14, 2024 before the Honorable Justice Sternlicht, a decision was given effect to the agreement of the parties' counsel, according to which the parties waive the cross-examinations of the witnesses, submit written summaries and on the basis of them, a judgment will be issued.
- On June 24, 2025, the President of the Magistrate's Courts of the Central District, the Honorable Judge Menachem Mizrahi, issued a decision, according to which in view of the incapacity of the Honorable Justice Sternlicht, the judgment in the case would be delayed.
- The case was transferred to me and following the plaintiff's requests of December 2, 2025 and January 4, 2026, this judgment was rendered.
Discussion and Decision
- The subject of the lawsuit in this case is the plaintiff's photograph that was displayed on an advertising website with text as follows:
"My name is Sharon Golan and I want to recommend you an amazing person thanks to whom I passed the exams at the academic institution I study at. I have been looking for a private English teacher since I have a lot of difficulty with the language... Within a short time I took the test with knowledge that I didn't have before, I took the 92 grade thanks to Guy who taught me methods, techniques and a lot of vocabulary..." (Hereinafter: "Publication Text").