---
title: "UserWay: interim comparative-advertising relief"
language: en
canonical: https://osint.v3rta.com/dossiers/accessibe/userway-dispute/
as_of: 2026-10-10
---

# UserWay: interim comparative-advertising relief

**Question.** What did the Israeli interim order decide, and what did it leave open?

**Answer.** The March 2021 ruling required distinctions and changes to disputed comparative advertising. The retained evidence does not establish the final disposition of the main claim.

## The interim Israeli decision

- Analysis: In 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. [s-d297] [s-d298]
  - 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.

## Userway later

- Analysis: The 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. [s-d216] [s-d299] [s-d307] [s-d326] [s-d361]
  - 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.

## Sources

- [s-d297] Court record source · s-d297
- [s-d298] Court record source · s-d298
- [s-d216] Other source · s-d216
- [s-d299] Other source · s-d299
- [s-d307] Media source · s-d307
- [s-d326] Company statement source · s-d326
- [s-d361] Other source · s-d361