UserWay: interim comparative-advertising relief

analysisIn UserWay Ltd. v. accessiBe Ltd., Tel Aviv case 43503-01-21, the court made an interim order on 2 March 2021 addressing comparative advertising. Continued disputed publications had to distinguish UserWay’s free products from paid products and alter specified language, including the expression “lawsuit magnet”; otherwise a temporary ban on mentioning UserWay in those publications would apply. ^{1 2}

qualification

This was an interim decision, not a final damages judgment. UserWay’s requested NIS 2.8 million was a pleaded demand. The order required UserWay security of NIS 60,000 and awarded NIS 10,000 plus VAT in legal costs; the retained OCR has reversed Hebrew segments.

response

accessiBe defended the publications as true, cited customer lawsuits and challenged UserWay Ltd.’s standing; the court rejected the standing objection while reserving merits issues.

outcome

The final outcome of the principal Israeli claim and any counterclaim is not established by the retained evidence.

analysisThe companies engaged in public competitive comparisons around the 2021 dispute. Level Access announced completion of its UserWay acquisition on 20 March 2024. UserWay’s retained 2024 reporting identifies a different material customer proceeding and does not describe an outcome of the earlier Israeli accessiBe dispute. ^{1 2 3 4 5}

qualification

Omission from a later material-litigation list could reflect completion or a materiality judgment; it does not prove a settlement or victory. UserWay’s own marketing claims are not proof of accessiBe’s product performance.