Court Dismisses $101M Class Action Against El Al Israel Airlines

An Israeli court has dismissed a proposed class action lawsuit seeking $101 million in damages from El Al Israel Airlines, removing a significant legal overhang that had challenged the carrier’s fee practices and potentially exposed it to wide compensation liabilities.

The case was brought before the Central District Court in Lod and sought to consolidate multiple consumer claims against Israel’s flag carrier. Plaintiffs had argued that El Al’s collection of certain security-related fees was unlawful, asserting that the airline continued to charge levies to passengers even after the State of Israel significantly increased its participation in security costs. The suit aimed to represent a broad class of affected travellers seeking restitution of fees paid over an extended period. 

In its ruling, the court rejected the request for consolidating individual claims into a single class action, effectively ending the collective litigation in its proposed form. Legal principles governing class action certification in Israel require stringent criteria for showing commonality of claims and potential remedies; in this instance, the court determined that those criteria were not met and therefore dismissed the consolidated action. 

El Al’s fee structure — including assessments designed to cover security expenses and related operational charges — has been defended by the airline and by courts in past proceedings. A prior class action attempt focused on similar issues related to security levies was dismissed on grounds that such charges form part of the airfare rather than a standalone fee subject to separate reimbursement.

The current dismissal removes uncertainty over potential mass damags claims that once loomed over the airline’s balance sheet and compliance frameworks. For airline network planners, financial officers and legal teams, the resolution of high-value litigation carries implications for pricing strategy and risk management, especially in markets where fee components can generate controversy with consumer groups and regulators. 

Legal experts note that class action certification standards in Israel differentiate between individual remedies and collective claims for statutory recompense, often making it difficult for broad consumer suits to succeed against well-established carriers. The El Al case highlights how aviation-sector litigation can intersect with regulatory interpretations of fee structures that are embedded in published fare schedules and international ticketing practices.

While the court dismissed the consolidated class action, individual plaintiffs may still pursue their claims separately, although absent class certification such suits typically involve higher transaction costs and limited bargaining leverage against major carriers. The decision also underscores the importance of judicial gatekeeping in determining which cases proceed as collective actions, particularly in industries with standardized contracts of carriage and complex pricing components. 

For El Al — whose network spans domestic and international routes with a Boeing-dominant fleet — the dismissal of this lawsuit allows management to focus on operational priorities, fleet deployment and market competition without the shadow of a potentially large contingent liability. In a sector where legal exposures and regulatory scrutiny often overlap, clear legal outcomes such as this can help stabilise investor and consumer confidence in an airline’s commercial footing.