Interview with: Dr. Guy Carmi, Founder

I am first and foremost an Israeli litigator. Litigation is not an occasional activity in our firm — it is the core of the practice.

Before establishing the firm, I spent over thirteen years in a leading Israeli law firm, most of them as a partner, handling large-scale commercial disputes and matters involving international clients. That experience shaped both my professional standards and my approach to complexity.

My academic training in the United States (LL.M. and S.J.D., University of Virginia), together with an MBA from Tel Aviv University, complements full-time litigation practice. I am among the relatively few doctoral-level lawyers in Israel who maintain an active courtroom practice on a daily basis. That combination of academic depth, business literacy and sustained litigation experience shapes the way arguments are structured and presented — with clarity, discipline and close attention to judicial expectations. My international background and U.S. legal training also support the handling of cross-border disputes, both in terms of legal framework and cultural fluency.

Many of our matters involve foreign companies, international shareholders or coordination with overseas counsel. In those situations, clients require an Israeli litigator who can operate naturally in English, understand cross-border enforcement dynamics and navigate the Israeli courts with authority.

The firm remains intentionally focused. Clients work directly with me and a carefully selected senior team, without layers of hierarchy. That structure allows for discretion, speed and strategic clarity in high-value disputes.

We expect continued growth in complex commercial litigation, derivative and governance-related disputes, public tender litigation and regulatory conflicts involving foreign entities.

Regulatory scrutiny in Israel continues to intensify, particularly in sectors involving public funds or cross-border investment. At the same time, shareholders and market participants are increasingly willing to use litigation as a strategic instrument.

Cross-border elements are also becoming more frequent — whether in the enforcement of foreign judgments, recognition of arbitral awards under the New York Convention or disputes involving multinational corporate structures.

In addition, artificial intelligence is moving from theory to operational reality, intersecting with regulation, innovation and legal uncertainty. These developments are increasingly generating complex disputes and regulatory challenges.

We have strengthened our emphasis on early-stage strategic assessment.

Before litigation escalates, we conduct structured analysis of legal exposure, enforcement pathways and commercial implications. This allows clients to make informed decisions based not only on the immediate dispute, but also on long-term positioning.

The objective is not merely procedural success, but strategic clarity.

We reinforce our legal analysis with carefully selected advanced research and analytical tools, adding a further layer of scrutiny while preserving independent professional judgment.

Technology has improved research efficiency and regulatory monitoring, particularly in complex disputes.

However, in high-stakes litigation, judgment remains central. Technology supports preparation and analysis, but strategic advocacy and courtroom presence remain human responsibilities.

Clients benefit from deeper analytical capacity and faster response times, while maintaining direct senior-level communication.

As AI tools become more widespread across industries, they also facilitate cross-border communication and documentation, particularly where language or jurisdictional gaps exist.

In cross-border disputes involving foreign stakeholders, litigation is rarely confined to a single jurisdiction.

In one matter, beyond addressing the substantive legal issues before the Israeli court, we structured the case with enforcement considerations and international exposure in mind from the outset. By coordinating strategy with overseas counsel and aligning procedural steps with potential enforcement scenarios, the client’s leverage extended beyond the immediate proceeding.

In complex disputes, legal strategy and enforcement strategy must operate together.

Clients increasingly seek advisors who combine legal depth, commercial awareness and stability.

In three years’ time, I see the firm continuing as a focused litigation boutique handling complex disputes in Israel, including matters with significant cross-border dimensions and arbitration-related elements. We aim to further strengthen our position in high-value and complex proceedings, serving both foreign and domestic clients who require senior-level strategic representation.

Growth, for us, means greater sophistication, deeper expertise and continued direct involvement in significant cases — not expansion for its own sake.