Lawsuit Filed Against Phoenix Insurance Over Canceled Health Policy
A 60-year-old Israeli woman is suing Phoenix insurance at the Tel Aviv Magistrates' Court after her health policy was canceled following an autoimmune disease diagnosis.
A 60-year-old resident of northern Israel has filed a lawsuit at the Tel Aviv Magistrates' Court against the insurance company Phoenix, alleging unlawful cancellation of her health insurance policy after she was diagnosed with an autoimmune disease. According to her attorney, Ran Shapira, the plaintiff seeks to restore her policy to active status under its original terms without exclusions.
Background and Policy Issuance
Before joining the insurance plan, the insured individual suffered from a rash and itching. In December 2024, she underwent a skin biopsy that did not yield a definitive diagnosis. During the underwriting process, Phoenix requested a medical summary. A certificate issued by her family doctor on March 9, 2025, stated that she did not suffer from a chronic illness and was not taking regular medication, but it explicitly mentioned the itchy rash and the prior medical evaluation without a clear diagnosis. After completing the health declaration and underwriting process, the policy took effect in May 2025.
Diagnosis and Policy Cancellation
In September 2025, following a deterioration in her condition and examinations at Ziv Medical Center, the insured was diagnosed with pemphigus for the first time. She required hospitalizations and expensive treatments, including steroids and biological therapy, and subsequently requested insurance benefits from Phoenix. However, in July 2026, she received a notice canceling her policy. The company offered her the option to repurchase the policy subject to new acceptance conditions and medical exclusions, specifically excluding the pemphigus disease.
Phoenix claimed that the insured provided incomplete information in her health questionnaire and that had they known her full medical condition, they would not have accepted her before completing the investigation. In contrast, Attorney Shapira argues that the company received the exact medical summary it demanded and chose to accept her without requesting further documentation or waiting for a final diagnosis, rendering the retroactive cancellation void.
