Israel's Supreme Court Rules on Clalit Health Fund Data Privacy

Israel's Supreme Court has ruled on a significant privacy case involving Clalit Health Services, the country's largest health fund, concerning the protection of its members' personal and medical information. The case, initially filed as a class-action lawsuit by Nona Day, questioned Clalit's previous system where a member's identity number alone was sufficient to access sensitive personal and medical details via its telephone service center. This information included appointment dates, doctor identities, and clinic locations, which the plaintiff argued could reveal details about a person's health and life routines.

Clalit had initially defended its system, stating the information provided was largely technical, not sensitive, and that the telephone service was crucial for members less comfortable with technology, such as the elderly. The health fund also argued that any privacy breach was negligible. However, during proceedings at the Supreme Court on February 4, 2026, the court suggested Clalit modify its procedures to address potential privacy violations.

In response, Clalit implemented a technological solution and revised its identification mechanism. Under the new system, automated services are only available to callers from a mobile phone number registered with Clalit and linked to their identity number. If the caller's phone number doesn't match their registered information, no data is disclosed. Clalit also updated its website and patient guide with information on data protection and privacy policies.

These changes were deemed satisfactory by the plaintiff and her legal team, leading them to withdraw the class-action certification request. While the core privacy issue was resolved, the parties could not agree on compensation and legal fees. The Supreme Court, in its ruling on June 24, 2026, acknowledged that the class-action request had raised a genuine privacy concern and that Clalit's subsequent actions had addressed this issue effectively. The court noted the benefit to Clalit's approximately 5.5 million members.

However, the court did not award the amounts sought by the plaintiff, deeming the technological changes important but not exceptionally complex or costly, and the extent of potential harm not sufficiently proven. The Supreme Court accepted the appeal, overturned the lower court's decision and cost order, and dismissed the class-action request. Clalit was ordered to pay the plaintiff 25,000 shekels plus VAT as compensation, and her representatives 100,000 shekels plus VAT for legal fees, along with reimbursement for the lower court's filing fee. The court clarified that this dismissal does not prevent individual members from pursuing claims for damages they may have suffered due to the previously identified privacy issue.