© All rights reserved to Barnea Jaffa Lande Law offices

Shir Rozenzweig
Adv. Shir Rozenzweig

Electra City Tower
58 Harakevet St.
Tel Aviv
6777016

Practice areas:

Shir Rozenzweig

Shir specializes in regulatory enforcement and white-collar matters in Israel and abroad.

Adv. Shir Rozenzweig  represents companies and individuals in a wide range of complex criminal and administrative enforcement proceedings, from the investigative stages to hearings and trials.

 

Shir advises her clients on intricate legal proceedings related to money laundering, bribery, fraud, insider trading, antitrust, and securities fraud. She provides representation before Israeli governmental authorities, foreign authorities, and judicial forums in Israel and abroad.

 

Shir has unique experience handling internal investigations involving suspicions of corporate misconduct or fraud, compliance with regulatory requirements, and proper corporate governance rules. She also has experience in witness preparation, and trial preparation. In addition, Shir has extensive experience in electronic document review.

 

Shir interned at a leading Israeli law firm.

Education:


Tel Aviv University, LL.B., 2017

Admission:


Member of Israel Bar Association since 2018

News and updates - Shir Rozenzweig:


October 27, 2021

Representation in Defamation Lawsuit against Channel 13 and Guy Lerer

We are representing the singer Eyal Golan in a NIS 1 million defamation lawsuit against Channel 13 and journalist Guy Lerer, the host of TV program Hazinor, following an investigative article that dealt with the marketing of agricultural land by a company owned by Golan. Adv. Dror Arad-Ayalon and Adv. Shir Rozenzweig are providing representation in the matter. They argued in the statement of claim that Golan's company is not connected to the allegations presented in the article and that Golan and his company are not involved in the marketing process whatsoever.

September 8, 2020

The Ultimate Guide to eDiscovery

In the past, legal proceedings were often accompanied by boxes of binders being passed between plaintiff and defendant, or prosecution and defense. Today, most documents are provided to the parties electronically. 

 

This has opened the door to an era of massive discovery of thousands different kinds of documents of between the parties (Word documents, PDFs, Excel spreadsheets, emails, photos, and audio files), which was uncommon in the days of paper and binders. Thus, reviewing the documents provided by the other party, analyzing them, and identifying the materials necessary for the proceeding has become more and more complicated and requires a significant amount of time and resources.

 

The transition to electronic discovery has prompted companies to develop electronic tools to store and manage documents disclosed in the course of legal proceedings. As a result, eDiscovery systems were born. Through these systems, which are for the most part operated by designated companies who specialize in this, the manual review is replaced with artificial intelligence and search terms, and the binders are replaced with computerized folders organized by categories.

 

The costs involved in this new ideal are considerable and primarily depend on the size of the documents uploaded to the system, the number of system users, and the number of programming hours, according to the demands of the client. At the same time, in cases that involve the discovery of tens and hundreds of thousands of documents, the cost might be worth it in light of the saved time and the optimization of the evidence review and search.

 

In the United States, for example, eDiscovery has become the norm, so that disclosing and transferring documents to the other party is done directly through the eDiscovery system.

 

How to do this properly?

 

  1. As a preliminary step and as preparation for a future scenario in which you may become party to a legal proceeding, it is recommended to manage the information you produce and receive through proper protocols, in advance. Take, for example, a protocol for saving certain information under a unified information management system, categorized according to different content issues of each document or according to types of documents.


  2. Remote work – A protocol should be designed to define and require the storage of certain information or documents in a unified information management system, so that important documents are not left in an employee's personal folders on a private computer. Currently, in the age of COVID-19, which has forced many businesses to work partly or fully remotely, it is important to develop organized work protocols concerning the uniform management of information.


  3. Deleting unnecessary information – The kind of information deemed unnecessary in the long run must be defined, such as intra-organization email correspondence, in order to be deleted at regular time intervals determined in advance. Alternatively, it may not be saved at any time at all. This issue raises concerns that, in the event proceedings are initiated against you, certain deletions may be viewed as obstruction of justice. However, if such deletions are made in the course of a reasonable and transparent protocol with defined periodical deletions or non-storage as described above, and if upon the initiation of the proceeding the documents relevant to it are not deleted, these will not rise to obstruction of justice because the offense's ingredient of intentto obstruct an existing concrete judicial proceeding, is not met (Uri Elgad v. The State of Israel). In the United States, this issue has already been considered. The US Supreme Court found that a person instructing his employees to shred documents in accordance with a documents saving protocol, rather than because of a specific judicial proceeding for which the documents may be material, has not committed obstruction of justice (Arthur Anderson LLP v. United States).

 

Proper management and organization of documents is a responsible and highly useful step. It will save precious time by providing efficient and effective familiarity with the evidence throughout the legal proceeding, and will also lead to the highest quality legal strategy. In addition, managing such information will eliminate and reduce conflicts between other parties to the proceeding in terms of discovery. 

May 24, 2020

An Opportunity for Regulators

The Israel Securities Authority's current enforcement policy forces officers and companies that have acted in good faith to prove as much in an administrative enforcement proceeding. Check out an opinion article by Dr. Zvi Gabbay and Shir Rozenzweig published in TheMarker about how regulators can adjust this policy.

See all news of Shir Rozenzweig >

Practice areas:
Enter your email for newsletter sign up: