Defamation Defense & Defendant Representation · Legal briefing
Pleading Truth & Good Faith: Defence Evidence
By Adv. Yechiel Rachamim Menahemov & Adv. Assaf ShpigelPublished:
Start with the publication and its context
A statement of claim does not establish liability. Identify the passages relied upon, their meaning to a reasonable reader, the recipients and whether the claimant is identifiable. A single screenshot without the thread, responses or audience may present an incomplete picture. Where relevant, also consider permitted publications under section 13 before selecting a substantive defence.
Section 14: truth and public interest
The truth defence requires both truth in the published matter and public interest in its publication. Public interest is not simply audience curiosity: examine the public value of the information and the context of disclosure. The statute preserves the defence where an unproven incidental detail causes no substantial injury. A central harmful allegation does not become incidental merely because other statements are accurate. Defamation Prohibition Law — National Legislation Database
The evidential burden: sincere belief is insufficient
A defendant relying on section 14 must establish the defence. Original documents, witnesses with personal knowledge and reliable records may support the account; a screenshot repeating a rumour does not itself establish its underlying truth. Map every material allegation against supporting evidence and possible contradictions. Later-discovered evidence may help prove truth, but does not retrospectively demonstrate what verification occurred before publication.
Section 15: good faith within a recognised circumstance
Good faith is not a general exemption for anyone without an intention to harm. Identify a statutory circumstance, such as a duty to publish, protection of a legitimate personal interest, opinion in the circumstances specified by law or a complaint to a competent authority. Protection for a complaint does not necessarily extend to circulating it elsewhere. Adding ‘in my opinion’ does not convert a factual accusation into protected opinion; assess the complete message and the factual basis supplied to readers.
Section 16: subjective belief and objective safeguards
Section 16 establishes presumptions concerning good faith and its absence. Publication within section 15 and reasonable bounds may attract a presumption of good faith. Conversely, disbelief in the allegation, failure to take reasonable verification steps where it is untrue, or an intention to cause excessive harm may undermine the defence under the statutory conditions. Examine sources, checks, language, distribution and recipients alongside the publisher’s state of mind.
Dayan-Orbach: responsible journalism is not blanket immunity
In Further Civil Hearing 2121/12, Anonymous v Dayan-Orbach, decided on 18 September 2014, the Supreme Court distinguished truth from responsible journalism under section 15(2). Professional responsibility concerns the publication process, rather than belief alone. The judgment does not protect every inaccurate report or private social post. Application requires examination of public interest, verification and circumstances; the court also distinguished the broadcasts from their promotional trailers. Full Supreme Court judgment — DHC 2121/12
Defence pleadings and cross-examination
Alternative defences may be considered, but each needs a coherent factual foundation and unexplained contradictions should be avoided. Cross-examination can test omitted context, witness knowledge, identification and alleged loss. A broad assertion that ‘everything was true’ is inadequate. Subsequent judgments and factual developments require case-specific review: a familiar precedent does not replace analysis of the evidence and the law applicable when the proceedings are conducted.
Preparing for the consultation
Preserve the claim and its service date, the complete publication, links, screenshots and original correspondence. Prepare a source and witness list and a timeline of pre-publication checks and subsequent responses. Do not alter records or repeat allegations to prove your point. Early advice allows a defence to be selected and correction, removal or negotiation to be assessed separately, without overlooking procedural deadlines.