Written by: Haim Ravia, Dotan Hammer
Israel’s Supreme Court ruled on March 22, 2026 that the municipality of Ramat Gan made “reckless” use of artificial intelligence in administrative proceedings concerning a child with special needs. The court found that the municipality relied on materials generated by AI tools that included a non-existent Education Ministry directive and fabricated court rulings, and exceptionally ordered the municipality to pay 30,000 NIS (approximately $9,600) in legal costs.
The case involved a dispute over the provision of special educational services to a child, in which the municipality submitted documentation that purported to cite official directives and judicial precedents. Upon review, the court determined that the cited sources did not exist and had been fabricated by a generative AI system. The court characterized the municipality’s reliance on unverified AI-generated content as reckless—a term carrying significant weight in Israeli legal discourse, as it implies a level of fault exceeding mere negligence.
This decision represents the latest in a growing line of Israeli case law addressing the responsibilities of parties who utilize generative AI tools in legal and administrative contexts. In February 2025, the Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling criticizing an attorney’s submission of AI-generated court documents that contained references to non-existent judgments and fabricated quotes. In that decision, Justice Gila Canfy-Steinitz delineated the duties of attorneys regarding the use of AI systems and the sanctions they may face for submitting unverified AI-generated materials. A subsequent May 2025 decision by the Tel Aviv District Court applied similar reasoning, ordering a lawyer to pay personal costs for submitting AI-generated references to non-existent rulings in a class action proceeding.
The Ramat Gan ruling is significant because it extends judicial scrutiny beyond attorneys in litigation to municipalities and administrative bodies that rely on AI outputs in official decision-making affecting citizens’ rights. The court’s use of the term “reckless” signals a heightened standard of care when public bodies employ AI tools in processes that directly impact individuals, particularly vulnerable populations such as children with special needs.
Click here to read the Israeli Supreme Court’s decision (in Hebrew).
