Couple Ordered to Pay $8,500 for Defaming Optician Online

A Tel Aviv court has ordered a couple to pay nearly NIS 33,000 (approximately $8,500) to an optician for defamation, after they posted three negative online reviews. The dispute began in November 2020 when Svetlana and Alexander Giterrman purchased custom-made multifocal lenses from Optometrist chain Optinath, owned by Natanel (Nati) Shashonov, for NIS 9,000. Svetlana reportedly regretted the purchase the next day and sought to cancel, but Shashonov refused, citing the custom nature of the lenses. The couple claimed repeated delays and defective products, while Shashonov stated Svetlana's changing frame preferences caused the delays.

The couple first sued Shashonov in small claims court for the NIS 9,000, but their claim was dismissed in February 2022, with the court finding Shashonov's version more credible and no evidence of fraud or defective goods. An appeal to the district court upheld these factual findings, though it did modify the financial remedy. These prior rulings formed the basis for Shashonov's subsequent defamation lawsuit.

Between December 2020 and April 2021, the Giterrmans posted three one-star reviews on Google. Svetlana called Shashonov a "fraudster and crook" and advised others to "stay away." Alexander claimed they "bought only trouble" and paid for glasses they never received. A fourth incident involved a loud argument in the store, recorded by Svetlana, where she called Shashonov a "fraudster" and "crook" in front of another customer and suggested he should "be put in jail."

Judge Guy Hyman ruled that all four publications constituted defamation under Israeli law, rejecting the defense that they were legitimate consumer reviews. He stated that genuine reviews are fact-based and distinguish between fact and opinion, which was lacking here. The judge found the couple's intent was to personally attack Shashonov rather than contribute to public discourse. The defense of truth also failed, as prior court rulings had already established Shashonov did not act in bad faith or defraud anyone.

While the judge did not award damages for the in-store argument due to unproven damages, the three online reviews were deemed to have reached a wider audience. The couple was ordered to pay Shashonov NIS 20,052 for defamation (including interest and linkage differentials), plus NIS 3,750 in court costs and NIS 8,850 in legal fees, totaling close to NIS 33,000.