In the article written by Adv. Orly Tannenbaum and published in Calcalist, the impact of Deepfake technology on the law of evidence is examined, and how the ability to forge visual and audio documentation undermines the reliability of evidence in court. The article calls for adapting the legal system to the age of artificial intelligence in order to address the new technological challenges.

Artificial intelligence is already here, but responsibility has not disappeared – it has only become sharper. In the article written by Adv. Orly Tannenbaum and published in Calcalist, Adv. Tannenbaum examines how AI tools are changing not only the efficiency of legal work, but also the economics of litigation, the manner in which costs are awarded, and the boundaries of the professional responsibility of lawyers – and even of the courts themselves. Beyond the question of saving time and costs, the article addresses deeper questions: what is the true value of legal work in an age in which text is generated at the click of a button, how a paradox of overload instead of efficiency is created, and why דווקא in the age of algorithms greater human responsibility, stricter review, and judgment that cannot be delegated are required.

Civil Litigation – “What Is the Cost of Justice? Reflections of a Litigator on Legal Costs as an Indicator of the Structure of Civil Procedure“. Calcalist, 8.5.2025.

Article abstract: The normative framework in Israel recognizes the importance of realistic cost reimbursement, yet its practical implementation is still evolving. When awarded costs fail to reflect the actual investment in the legal process, values such as accessibility, procedural equality, and public trust in the judicial system may be undermined. In an article authored by Advocate Orly Tenennbaum and published in Calcalist, Advocate Tenennbaum examines the role of cost awards in civil litigation, their contribution to the efficient regulation of proceedings, and the means to bridge the gap between legislative intent and judicial practice.

Civil litigation – “Civil Procedure Regulations” – Whoever Stands Behind and to my Side and in Front of Me is the One Who Stands” – The Preliminary Hearing as a Playground” (Lawyer Journal, Israeli Bar, Vol. 51, April 2023, Pages 66-69).

Article abstract: An article inspired by the reform in the Civil Procedure Regulations that discusses the preliminary hearing – a new tool for hearings that was integrated in the Civil Procedure Regulations  demonstrating how the expectation and hope for early preparation of litigants and their attorneys as part of the preliminary hearing does not materialize and how said preliminary hearing acts as a quasi playground for the litigiants.

Corporate litigation – Derivative Action – “The Tail Wags the Dog” – How a Preliminary Procedural Process (pre-pre-preliminary) of “Disclosure of Documents” before Filing a Derivative Lawsuit took “Center Stage” in the “Derivative Lawsuit” track? (Lawyer Journal, Israeli Bar, Volume 45, May 2020, Pages 93-92).

Article abstract: Article inspired by the Intercolony Rule – that discusses the need to restore the preliminary procedure of requesting disclosure of documents before submitting a derivative action (Section 198a of The Companies Law) to its natural place.