Tel Aviv Court Slams Weaponized Class-Action Lawsuits in Commercial Rivalry
A Tel Aviv court dismissed multi-million shekel class-action lawsuits filed against a tool distributor, ruling they were a weaponized commercial attack orchestrated by a bitter business rival.
A dramatic court ruling in Tel Aviv has exposed the abuse of class-action lawsuits as a tool for commercial warfare, following a series of multi-million shekel claims filed against a tool-distribution company.
The Legal Attack and Commercial Rivalry
At the center of the legal battle was "Eshinu Esk", a tool-distribution company owned by Yosef Bibas. According to a report published by The Marker, Bibas's former business partner—who became a bitter commercial rival following a 2016 dispute—orchestrated a campaign behind the scenes to collapse his former partner's business.
Within just four months in 2017, "Eshinu Esk" faced a barrage of five separate class-action lawsuits regarding the safety of its products, totaling an unprecedented 300 million shekels. While the lawsuits were nominally filed by various consumers, it was later revealed that many of them had familial or friendly ties with employees of the competing company.
Judge's Severe Criticism and Heavy Penalties
Judge Amir Weizenblith harshly criticized the proceedings, noting that the litigation—which was later renewed for an amount of 103 million shekels—was never intended to benefit consumers. Instead, it constituted a calculated strategy by an external party to impose heavy economic and operational burdens on a competitor.
To root out this phenomenon, the judge ordered the plaintiffs to pay exceptional legal costs of 100,000 shekels, with a clear hint that the competing entity behind them would ultimately bear the financial penalty.
"This was a calculated strategy by a foreign entity to economically and operationally burden its competitor under the guise of consumer protection."
On the other hand, the plaintiffs' legal counsel, Adv. Menachem Chami Menachem, sharply attacked the decision. He emphasized that the court chose to ignore the core issue—the marketing of dangerous tools that failed to meet official standards, a fact that even prompted an enforcement file by the Standards Institution of Israel. According to him, the ruling creates a dangerous chilling effect that will deter ordinary citizens from fighting for public safety.
