When Employers Sue Ex-Employees for Millions: A Guide to Fighting Suppression Lawsuits

An Israeli labor-law explainer published on June 14, 2026, describes how former employers sometimes file very large lawsuits against employees who resign, allegedly to intimidate them and discourage them from exercising their freedom to work elsewhere. The article says this practice is known internationally as a SLAPP, or strategic lawsuit against public participation, and notes that Israeli courts have given it growing attention, especially after the Supreme Court ruling in Civil Appeal 1954/24 Vaknin v. Kibbutz Nir David, issued on January 7, 2025.

The article defines a suppression lawsuit in labor relations as a case brought by a well-resourced party, usually an employer, not primarily to win legitimate legal relief but to wear down and silence the other side through financial pressure. In workplace disputes, it says former employers may accuse ex-workers of trade secret theft or conspiracy without solid evidence, mainly to frighten them and send a chilling message to other employees.

As a current example, the article points to a case now being heard at the Tel Aviv-Jaffa Regional Labor Court, case number 67648-11-25, in which O.I.G. Marketing and Distribution Ltd. and Uniko New Retail Ltd. sued three former employees from a consumer-electronics sales group for a total of 3 million shekels. The claims include theft of trade secrets, breach of trust, and conspiracy. The workers, two of them sales agents, had resigned after what the article calls a pattern of organizational pressure and moved to different employers. They are represented by attorneys Mor Lusky-Yesaour and Amir Eidan.

The article says the lawsuit has already backfired, because the workers discovered only after being sued that their social rights may have been underpaid during years of employment. They have now filed counterclaims for unpaid overtime, pension contributions, sales commissions, and severance pay. The article says the original complaint has become a “double-edged sword” for the employers.

According to the article, the Vaknin precedent gives courts a practical tool against such cases by imposing especially heavy legal costs on the party using litigation to silence others, sometimes even matching the amount originally claimed. It says labor courts are increasingly applying stricter standards against employers that use inflated lawsuits against former staff, and that proper legal representation can both defeat the claim and recover missed employment rights.