The conciliation agreement made in this case on April 7, 2019 was published on the defendant's website. As stated, the conciliation agreement was drawn up by hand on a standard form, and it details the payment that the employer agreed to pay to the plaintiff, as well as the name of the plaintiff. In this settlement agreement, the plaintiff's ID number is also recorded in the form. The form contains the signature of the plaintiff and his attorney, and in its place appears the signature of the plaintiff and/or his attorney, as well as of the mediator, the employer's representative and her counsel, as well as the signature of the judge who gave the arrangement the validity of a judgment (Appendix 10 to the statement of claim).
- On March 11, 2021, the plaintiff asked the defendant to remove the publication from the website, and on the same day it was agreed that the publication would be temporarily removed.
- On August 8, 2021, the court issued a decision to prohibit the publication of the agreement in light of the fact that it contained the plaintiff's ID number. And on September 12, 2021, the plaintiff asked the defendant to remove the publication of the document from her website. In response, the plaintiff received a standard notice from the defendant, in the same wording as the one sent to him in response to his inquiries in the aforementioned cases as well, detailing the defendant's policy regarding the removal of publications:
"We publish information from the website of the court system as published by the court without editing or modifications. If you find an error, send a link to the page where you found the error, along with a description of the error, and we will work to correct it as soon as possible. We remove the name of the plaintiff in claims for personal injury, and the name of the defendant/deceased in criminal cases that ended in incapacity to stand trial. If you find an error in this regard, contact us and we will try to correct it as soon as possible. To remove content for which there is a gag order, please submit a gag order from the court. We note that in other cases, in accordance with the policy of not removing the content presented on the website, as a rule, content will not be removed." (The correspondence was attached as Appendix 4 to the defendant's affidavit)
- According to the defendant, from the moment a decision was made to her regarding the confidentiality of the details, the publication was removed (see paragraph 4.7 of the affidavit). The plaintiff did not deny the claim.
- Documents from another appeal against a medical committee's decision
On the page bearing the name of the plaintiff on the "Judgment Worm" website, there is a link to the judgment in the plaintiff's appeal against the National Insurance Institute's determination of disability (hereinafter referred to: "Appeal against the National Insurance Institute"). In the judgment itself, the plaintiff's name is not mentioned, but is mentioned only in initials. Accordingly, even in the wording of the judgment published on the defendant's website, the judgment is published without mentioning the plaintiff's name. The body of the judgment details the plaintiff's claims regarding his disability, as well as a quote from medical documents he presented to support the claim. According to the plaintiff, linking the judgment to the page bearing his name negates the court's decision to publish the judgment while omitting identifying details.
- On November 24, 2022, the plaintiff, through his attorney, contacted the Legal Bureau of the Courts Administration, and claimed that "on November 23, 2022, the Trial Worm website was uploaded... The judgment in the... while mentioning his name..." (The reference was attached as Appendix 3 to the affidavit of the Courts Administration). The plaintiff did not claim or prove that he also approached the defendants.
- In any event, on December 19, 2022, the plaintiff filed a motion for a gag order to publish his name, and the next day, on December 20, 2022, the court issued a decision, instructing the defendant to remove the plaintiff's name from the website in all matters relating to this proceeding (the decision was attached as Appendix 1 to the defendants' affidavit).
- The plaintiff did not claim that he contacted the defendant with a request to remove the link, and did not attach to his affidavit any inquiries on this subject. In any event, according to the defendant's affidavit, the judgment was lifted immediately after the gag order was issued. The plaintiff disagrees with the claim in his summaries, but he did not submit evidence that refutes the defendant's testimony. The plaintiff was questioned on this question, and confirmed that the evidence he submitted regarding the publication (a printout from the Trialworm website and a video documenting the search) was prepared before the gag order was issued (p. 24 of the transcript, paras. 31 - p. 25, s. 39)
Documents from T.A. 3932-06-22