Notice of Approval of Settlement Agreement in Class Action Suit - Download

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Section 25(a)(4) of the Class Actions Law, that on May 29, 2022, a judgment was rendered approving the parties' request for approval of a settlement agreement in Case No. 44020-04-21 Arbiv v. Lod Municipality (hereinafter: “the Judgment” and the “Motion for Approval”). The Motion for Approval alleges that the Lod Municipality's websites were not accessible to people with disabilities. According to the applicant, this conduct contravenes, inter alia, various provisions of the Equal Rights for People with Disabilities Law, 5748-1988 (hereinafter: “the Equality Law”) and the Equal Rights for People with Disabilities Regulations (Accessibility Adjustments to Services), 5773-2013. The petitioner demanded that accessibility adjustments be made to the websites and that compensation be paid to the members of the group.

Main Points of the Settlement Agreement

“The group” to which the settlement agreement applies – "persons with disabilities for whose benefit or for the benefit of the realization of their rights, including under the Equal Rights Law, the respondent has an obligation to provide accessibility adjustments in internet services and/or telephone answering services and/or document receipt services and/or any other service under the Service Accessibility Regulations, which the respondent did not provide, in whole or in part, or which the respondent did not provide in accordance with the principles of the Equal Rights Law or the Service Accessibility Regulations."

Contents of the Agreement: The Lod Municipality undertakes to continue and persist in making accessibility adjustments on an ongoing basis, so that the websites comply with the provisions of the law, the mandatory standard, and the guidelines. In this regard, the parties have agreed that legal accessibility means accessibility that can be implemented and executed on all common screen readers, and the Lod Municipality undertakes to make accessibility adjustments to all documents it uploads to its websites. The Lod Municipality undertakes to continue and persist in making the aforementioned accessibility adjustments, and it will publish a dedicated notice on its websites that is accessible to people with disabilities, inviting them to report any problems regarding the accessibility of the websites. The respondent will allocate a dedicated email address for these inquiries and will handle them as quickly as possible, while updating the inquirer on the status of their inquiry. This mechanism does not detract from the respondent's legal obligation to correct “occasional malfunctions” within 60 days, as stated in the Service Accessibility Regulations, but only adds to this obligation. The respondent has undertaken to conduct a periodic review of its websites every six months to monitor and control accessibility issues and to ensure that all functional processes on the websites are accessible to people with disabilities as they are accessible to everyone else. The respondent undertakes to publish the accessibility arrangements in its various services and to make accessibility adjustments to its Call Center.

In addition, the Lod Municipality has undertaken to establish a playground within its municipal boundaries within two years of the decisive date, which will be uniquely adapted for people with disabilities, and in establishing the playground, the respondent will emphasize its accessibility for people with blindness, in all aspects derived therefrom. The respondent estimates the cost of establishing the playground and making the necessary accessibility adjustments at NIS 500,000.

Compensation and fees: The parties recommended payment of NIS 5,000 to the petitioner and NIS 40,000 (including VAT) to his attorney. These amounts were approved by the honorable court in its ruling.

Res Judicata: The ruling creates res judicata for the members of the group as defined above, in relation to all the claims and causes of action raised against Shufersal in the motion for certification.

 

Main Points of the Ruling

The ruling determined that the conditions for certifying the claim as a class action were met and that the settlement agreement was “appropriate, balanced, and beneficial to the group of plaintiffs, and that the settlement agreement was the most effective and fair way to resolve the dispute.”

Miscellaneous

The settlement agreement is available for review by the represented group in the class action register, on the respondent's website at https://www.lod.muni.il (where it can be downloaded), and, by prior arrangement, from the representative plaintiff's attorney, Yosef-Hai Aviaziz, by email at aviazizlaw@gmail.com or by phone at 048389358. The above is only a summary of the settlement agreement, and in any case of contradiction between the judgment and the contents of this notice, the judgment shall prevail. The content of this notice has been approved by the Court and is published in accordance with its decision.

Yosef-Hai Aviaziz, Attorney

Representative of the Petitioner

Natanel Otami, Attorney

Representative of the Municipality of Lod