Tel Aviv labor court recognizes skin cancer case as work-related injury after decades-old sun exposure

The Tel Aviv Labor Court recently recognized a man as a work injury victim after he was diagnosed with melanoma more than 30 years after years of job-related sun exposure. The court found that his earlier work in the sun, without consistent sunscreen or proper clothing, was enough to establish a causal link to the disease, even though the cancer was discovered much later.

According to the ruling, the claimant worked intermittently between 1974 and 1984, starting at about age 16, for a total of 40 months in a job described as a “network worker.” In 1985 he joined Israel Electric Corporation, also as a “network worker,” and was exposed to sunlight for an average of eight hours a day, five days a week. During that later period he was given sunscreen, long work clothes and a safety helmet.

He was diagnosed with melanoma in 2016 and underwent surgery in March 2017 to remove lymph nodes from his armpit. His requests to the National Insurance Institute and the labor court for recognition as a work injury victim were initially rejected, and he appealed to the National Labor Court. As part of that appeal, the case was sent back to the regional court with a new expert appointed to examine whether the workplace sun exposure caused the cancer. The expert concluded that even with years of protection later on, the exposure before 1985 was enough to increase the risk of melanoma. He said, “Even with many years of using protection against sun exposure, the exposure before protection was used, before 1985, was sufficient to increase his risk of developing melanoma.”

The claimant asked the court to adopt that opinion, arguing it was “unequivocal.” He also said the expert clarified that although the cancer was found in the armpit, which is not sun-exposed, the disease began in the skin and later spread there. The National Insurance Institute argued the opinion was flawed and noted that three other experts had rejected the microtrauma theory. Judge Michal Naim Dibrner nevertheless accepted the latest report as “comprehensive, orderly, properly reasoned and based on medical-professional foundations,” and preferred it over the others. She found the expert had adequately addressed both the armpit location and the later use of protection, explaining that the pre-1985 exposure and the disease’s long latency period were enough to support causation. The claim was accepted, he was recognized as a work injury victim on a microtrauma basis, and the National Insurance Institute was ordered to pay 10,000 shekels in legal costs.