Intellectual property enforcement before the Israeli courts — for international rights holders, in-house counsel, and foreign IP firms instructing local counsel.
Intellectual property rights that cannot be enforced are not rights; they are inventory. The commercial value of a trademark, a patent, a registered design, a copyrighted work, a database, or a trade secret is determined at the moment infringement occurs — by how quickly the rights holder can obtain relief from the court, how effectively the infringer’s commercial activity can be disrupted, and how credibly the holder can demonstrate to future infringers that enforcement follows breach.
Gershoni & Co. represents rights holders before the Israeli courts in the full spectrum of intellectual property enforcement proceedings — from urgent ex parte injunction applications and Anton Piller search-and-seizure orders, through substantive infringement trials, to appeals before the District and Supreme Courts. Our IP litigation practice is built around a particular operational capability: the ability to move from instruction to filed injunction application, supported by properly prepared affidavit and investigator evidence, in the short time-frames that genuine infringement cases demand.
IP litigation at the firm is led by Adv. Sa’ar Gershoni — founder and managing Partner, and the firm’s principal IP litigator. He personally runs the firm’s contested enforcement matters, from initial assessment through preliminary relief and to judgment. He holds an LL.M. in Law and Technology, is a member of INTA, and is the author of a book on parallel importation and intellectual property that has been cited by the Israeli Supreme Court — a body of work that sits at the centre of the cross-border enforcement and grey-market disputes that characterise contemporary IP litigation. Complex trial and appellate matters draw additional support from Adv. Raanan Ben-Ishay, whose fifteen-plus years of civil litigation experience and formative period as a judicial clerk at the Israeli Supreme Court equip him to second-chair substantial proceedings and take the lead on the appellate and procedural work at which he specialises. Where the litigation involves parallel proceedings before the Israel Patent Office — oppositions, cancellation actions, or Registrar appeals running alongside court enforcement — the team is reinforced by Adv. Avishay Bigman, head of the firm’s prosecution practice, whose fifteen-plus years of appearing before the Registrar contribute directly to coordinated strategy across both forums.
→ Full-spectrum IP enforcement · ex parte relief through to appellate work
→ Led by Adv. Sa’ar Gershoni · 15+ years, Supreme Court-cited IP author
→ Supported by Adv. Raanan Ben-Ishay · Supreme Court clerkship, civil litigator
→ Direct partner access · instruction to filed application in short time-frames
→ Regular Israeli litigation counsel for international rights holders and foreign IP firms
Read Our Reviews
A personal story: I ran into a small-but-urgent problem and started checking a few options on Google. Saar was the first I reached out to because of his informative content, and he replied on WhatsApp within 2 minutes. A 5-minute phone call and a two-hour wait later, what seemed like it would take months was resolved quickly and smoothly. Truly amazing. Thank you again!
At first, I was skeptical—just another lawyer making promises I doubted would be kept. Saar Gershoni proved me completely wrong. He explained exactly how to prove the copyright infringement on my video, documented everything professionally, , and the competitor removed the video and issued a written apology. He was patient and attentive despite my initial doubts, and in the end
A personal story: I ran into a small-but-urgent problem and started checking a few options on Google. Saar was the first I reached out to because of his informative content, and he replied on WhatsApp within 2 minutes. A 5-minute phone call and a two-hour wait later, what seemed like it would take months was resolved quickly and smoothly. Truly amazing. Thank you again!
HOW WE APPROACH IP LITIGATION
Litigation as a strategic tool, not a default response
Commencing proceedings is the most consequential decision a rights holder makes. Litigation commits time, management attention, and resources; it exposes the client to scrutiny of its own rights and conduct; and it sets the commercial precedent that will govern the client’s response to future infringement. We approach that decision with the seriousness it warrants. Before a claim is filed we work with the client — and with foreign counsel where a foreign rights holder instructs us — to identify the commercial objective the proceedings are meant to deliver, to test the evidentiary record that will support the claim, and to develop the strategic plan that will carry the matter through to its intended endpoint.
That preparation matters. Filing an application without the right factual record, or without a tested view of the legal grounds, leaves the claim exposed at precisely the point where the other side is most likely to strike back. Preparation that anticipates the respondent’s likely defence — including invalidity attacks, laches arguments, competing prior-use claims, and procedural challenges — produces stronger filings, faster hearings, and better commercial outcomes.
Pre-filing preparation is the difference between an injunction granted on first hearing and a matter that stalls for months at the procedural stage. Our practice is built around doing that preparation properly — once — rather than remediating it through amendments and supplementary affidavits after the application is on foot.
Need an Initial Consultation? Let's Talk!
Leave your details, and we'll get back to you shortly.
WHAT WE LITIGATE
The full range of IP enforcement matters
We represent rights holders — and, where the circumstances justify it, defendants of standing — across the full range of intellectual property enforcement before the Israeli courts:
- Trademark infringement and passing off — including counterfeit products, confusingly similar marks, dilution claims involving well-known marks, and passing-off claims under the Commercial Torts Law, 5759-1999, in respect of unregistered indicia of goodwill.
- Copyright infringement — literary and artistic works, software source code, databases, photography, online content, and architectural works, including claims under section 56 of the Copyright Act for statutory damages of up to NIS 100,000 per infringement without proof of loss, and parallel disgorgement claims under the law of unjust enrichment.
- Patent infringement and revocation — direct and contributory infringement claims, invalidity defences raised in infringement proceedings, revocation actions, and appeals from decisions of the Registrar of Patents.
- Design infringement — enforcement of registered design rights under the Designs Law, 5777-2017, and the Patents and Designs Ordinance as applicable, including both Hague-route and directly-filed Israeli registrations.
- Trade-secret and confidential-information claims — misappropriation of technical and commercial know-how, departing-employee cases, breach of confidentiality undertakings, and the interaction between trade-secret protection and contractual restraint provisions.
- Commercial torts and unfair competition — misleading descriptions, inducement of breach of contract, interference with commercial relations, and false advertising claims under the Commercial Torts Law.
- Internet and data disputes — online copyright and trademark infringement, domain-name disputes, platform-level takedown and enforcement, John Doe proceedings to unmask anonymous infringers, and database-right and data-scraping claims.
- Defamation and reputational harm — claims under the Defamation Law, 5725-1965, including the business-reputation dimension where the conduct complained of overlaps with unfair competition or trademark dilution.
THE TOOLS WE DEPLOY
Court procedure and preliminary relief
Israeli court procedure provides rights holders with a set of tools that, used skilfully, shift the commercial balance of an infringement dispute in the claimant’s favour from the earliest hearing. The District Courts have jurisdiction over IP infringement claims and are experienced in the procedural instruments that matter most in this area.
Ex parte preliminary injunctions
Where the harm from ongoing infringement is serious and immediate — a counterfeit product about to enter distribution, a knock-off about to launch, a competitor poised to make commercial use of misappropriated trade secrets — the District Courts have jurisdiction to grant preliminary injunctions without prior notice to the respondent, upon a showing of irreparable harm, a serious issue to be tried, and a balance of convenience favouring the claimant. Ex parte relief is a high-stakes procedure. It requires a full and frank disclosure of the applicant’s case, including material facts adverse to the applicant, on pain of the order being set aside.
We prepare ex parte applications in the form the courts expect: a concise statement of the cause of action, an affidavit that fully supports each element of the claim, evidence collected by investigators in the form of a documented and, where appropriate, video-recorded test purchase, and a clearly structured argument on the governing tests. Where the application is granted, we attend promptly to service, to the orderly conduct of the inter partes hearing that follows, and to the commercial negotiations that very often open once a preliminary order is in the respondent’s hands.
Search-and-seizure orders (Anton Piller relief)
In cases involving counterfeit goods, misappropriated trade secrets, or where there is a real risk that the respondent will destroy evidence if given notice, the Israeli courts have jurisdiction to issue search-and-seizure orders — the Israeli equivalent of the English Anton Piller order. These orders permit the claimant, under judicial supervision, to enter the respondent’s premises and seize infringing goods, business records, and digital evidence. They are among the most intrusive remedies Israeli civil procedure provides, and the evidentiary threshold for obtaining them is correspondingly high.
The firm has practical experience applying for and executing these orders, and we coordinate directly with the specialist investigation firms we work with on the surveillance and purchase work that typically precedes the application.
Substantive remedies
On the substantive side of the claim, Israeli courts have at their disposal the full range of remedies that international rights holders expect: permanent injunctions; damages assessed on a proof-of-loss basis; an account of the infringer’s profits; delivery-up or destruction of infringing goods; statutory damages without proof of loss (in copyright matters, up to NIS 100,000 per infringement); disgorgement of profits under the law of unjust enrichment, available as a parallel cause of action in appropriate cases; and in exceptional circumstances, punitive damages. Our role is to structure the claim so that the full range of available remedies is put before the court — not a narrow subset that leaves commercial value uncaptured.
Investigator-led evidence gathering
IP enforcement frequently turns on evidence that only a properly conducted investigation can produce — documented test purchases of infringing goods, surveillance of suspected operations, identification of supply chains and distribution networks, and the mapping of corporate structures behind anonymous online conduct. We work alongside a small group of specialist IP investigation firms with whom we have established working relationships, and we coordinate the investigator work with the legal proceeding so that what emerges from the investigation becomes affidavit-ready evidence by the time the application is filed.
Appeals
Appeals from the District Courts lie as of right to the Supreme Court on substantive points of law, and with leave on other matters. Appellate advocacy is a distinct discipline, requiring the condensed, written-led style that Israeli appellate procedure rewards. Adv. Ben-Ishai — whose career began with a judicial clerkship at the Supreme Court — leads the firm’s appellate work in matters where the substantive issues justify it.
Need an Initial Consultation? Let's Talk!
Leave your details, and we'll get back to you shortly.
FOR INTERNATIONAL RIGHTS HOLDERS AND FOREIGN COUNSEL
Your Israeli enforcement counsel
A substantial share of our IP litigation work originates internationally — from foreign rights holders confronting infringement in the Israeli market, from multinational in-house IP teams managing enforcement across multiple jurisdictions, and from foreign IP firms instructing local counsel on behalf of their own clients. The requirements of this work are distinctive, and our practice is structured around them.
What foreign instructing parties can expect
- Direct partner-level engagement from the first call. Your point of contact is Adv. Gershoni or Adv. Ben-Ishai — not a rotating junior associate. Strategic decisions about urgency, evidence gathering, and procedural route are made in conversation with you, not escalated afterwards.
- Realistic timing and costs at the outset. We provide an upfront assessment of the time required to move from instruction to filed application, the evidentiary and investigator work required, and the cost structure for each phase of the matter through trial and, where relevant, appeal.
- Reporting in your format. We work with the reporting conventions, docketing systems, and budget-management formats that international firms and multinational in-house teams actually use — not a proprietary format that requires translation at your end.
- Substantive local-law advice, clearly expressed. Our written advice on Israeli IP law is produced in a form that partners and senior in-house counsel in other jurisdictions can action directly. Complex Israeli procedural mechanisms are explained in the international terms they most closely correspond to, so the recipient can read the advice once and decide on it.
- Coordination with your parallel matters. Where the Israeli proceeding forms part of a broader multi-jurisdictional enforcement programme, we coordinate directly with the firms running parallel matters in other countries — on strategy, evidence-sharing, settlement positioning, and consistency of public statements.
Typical international mandates
International rights holders and foreign IP firms instruct us on matters including: counterfeit-product enforcement in the Israeli market and at Israel’s ports; trademark infringement claims against Israeli resellers, distributors, or direct competitors; copyright enforcement in respect of pirated software, content, and digital assets; patent infringement claims against Israeli manufacturers, importers, and service providers; trade-secret claims against former Israeli partners, employees, or contractors; parallel-importation and grey-market disputes; online and platform-level enforcement against Israeli-based infringers; and coordinated multi-jurisdictional enforcement where the Israeli front forms part of a larger campaign.
THE ISRAELI IP COURT SYSTEM
A brief orientation for international counsel
For practitioners unfamiliar with the Israeli system, a short note on the court architecture that IP enforcement moves through.
- Magistrate’s Courts — First-instance jurisdiction over IP infringement claims. Six District Courts operate across Israel; the Tel Aviv District Court handles the largest share of commercial and IP matters. The District Courts grant preliminary and permanent injunctions, award damages, and have authority to issue Anton Piller search-and-seizure orders.
- Registrar of Patents, Trademarks and Designs — Within the Israel Patent Office, the Registrar exercises quasi-judicial functions over oppositions, cancellations, and post-grant proceedings. Decisions of the Registrar are appealable to the District Courts.
- Supreme Court — Hears appeals from the District Courts as of right on substantive points of law, and with leave on other matters. The Supreme Court has developed a sophisticated body of IP jurisprudence and sits as the final appellate instance on questions of Israeli IP law.
- Procedural framework — IP proceedings are governed by the Civil Procedure Regulations, 5779-2018, together with the substantive IP statutes. Preliminary relief is governed by a well-developed body of case law applying the standard three-limb test of serious issue, irreparable harm, and balance of convenience.
- Timing — Ex parte relief can typically be obtained within days in genuinely urgent cases. Inter partes preliminary hearings follow within weeks. Substantive trials proceed in a written-led format with limited live testimony, with first-instance judgment ordinarily issued within 12–24 months of the close of pleadings, subject to the complexity and volume of the matter.
- Costs — Israeli courts award costs to the successful party, though quantification is typically conservative by comparison with common-law jurisdictions and rarely compensates a successful party’s full legal spend.
If you are evaluating Israeli IP enforcement for your client, or looking for local counsel to take on an existing Israeli matter, we welcome a direct conversation about the matter and how we would approach it.
Lead litigator: Adv. Sa’ar Gershoni · Trial & appellate support: Adv. Raanan Ben-Ishay · Parallel ILPO proceedings: Adv. Avishay Bigman
