Our Expertise & Solutions

Commercial litigation is the resolution of business disputes through court proceedings, involving the facts, legal claims, evidence and remedies at issue.

Ne’eman Keynan handles corporate, economic and commercial disputes. The legal analysis is considered alongside the effect on the business; not every disagreement should follow the same route, and a litigation mandate does not promise a particular result.

Ne’eman Keynan represents companies and executives in white-collar investigations and defence as part of its disputes and enforcement practice.

Its published description includes work involving the Israel Securities Authority, the Competition Authority and economic units of the police and prosecution. The appropriate response depends on the particular process, the facts and the position of the person or company involved.

Yes. Shareholder and control disputes are expressly included in the firm’s published litigation practice.

These matters can involve both a contested legal position and questions about the company’s decision-making and business direction. The firm’s wider corporate advisory practice also covers governance and control transactions, allowing those dimensions to be considered together.

Internal and independent investigations are listed among the firm’s areas of focus.

The Special Solutions practice also describes leading internal investigations as part of a coordinated response to a crisis. The mandate should identify the questions to be examined, the relevant material and the role of the legal team in the particular engagement.

Yes. Representation before arbitration tribunals is included in the firm’s published disputes practice.

The same stated focus on the legal merits and commercial consequences applies to its description of dispute work. The website does not prescribe arbitration for every conflict; the appropriate forum and strategy depend on the particular matter.

Yes. The firm describes corporate advice that ranges from routine legal counsel to significant transactions and strategic decisions.

The practice serves companies, controlling shareholders and management. Its published emphasis is on the points where legal exposure and business strategy meet, rather than restricting the service to a single transaction or a dispute after it arises.

Mergers and acquisitions are expressly included in the firm’s corporate transactions practice.

The published description also covers control transactions, cross-border reorganizations and major commercial agreements. It emphasizes identifying risk early and translating it into commercial and legal terms, drawing on experience with public and private company transactions.

Legal due diligence is a scoped review of legal rights, obligations and exposures relevant to the acquisition decision and transaction terms.

Ne’eman Keynan advises on M&A and control transactions. The review should be shaped by the business, transaction structure and questions requiring a decision; legal due diligence is not a substitute for financial, accounting or technical review.

There is no single timetable for legal due diligence: the scope, quality and volume of material, access to answers and transaction deadline all matter.

Ne’eman Keynan’s technology can support document work at scale, while legal review and unresolved questions remain part of the timetable. A schedule should follow an initial scope review; the website does not offer a fixed completion SLA.

The published practice includes advice on corporate governance, conflicts of interest, fiduciary duties and personal exposure.

The firm connects those subjects with the company’s business decisions and regulatory environment. The relevant advice depends on the decision and the role of the person involved; the website does not offer a universal board procedure or a conclusion about anyone’s liability.

The firm advises companies, boards and management on governance frameworks, internal policy and compliance processes for AI.

The scope covers the development, procurement, deployment and use of AI tools. The work connects legal and regulatory exposure with the way the technology is actually introduced and used in the organization.

Internal policy is expressly included in the firm’s AI governance practice.

The policy work sits alongside governance frameworks and compliance processes. The relevant questions are tied to how the organization develops, buys, deploys or uses AI; the firm does not present one policy as suitable for every organization.

The firm advises on AI-related commercial arrangements, including procurement, licensing, partnerships, governance and allocation of risk.

The approach connects contractual structure with regulatory exposure, data and operational reality. It treats the contract as part of the technology arrangement, rather than as a document separated from the system it governs.

The firm identifies data provenance, model boundaries and regulatory alignment as subjects in specialized AI transaction due diligence.

These subjects are considered alongside the transaction’s contractual and business structure. The published scope is a starting point for defining the engagement, not a statement that every model or dataset can be fully verified in every transaction.

This service describes legal advice, governance and transaction review, not a blanket certification of an AI system.

The firm’s published work connects legal, regulatory, contractual and data questions. Any technical testing, assurance standard or certification would need its own defined scope and evidence; none is implied by this questions section.

Special Solutions is the firm’s coordinated legal response to crises and unconventional situations involving immediate, overlapping risks.

The published scope includes unexpected investigations, cyber incidents and sudden shareholder disputes. The work connects internal investigations, management, legal representation and communications advice around the same situation.

Cyber incidents are included in the situations for which the firm describes a coordinated legal response.

The stated legal role connects management, legal advisers and communications advisers, including questions of information preservation and disclosure. This is not a representation that the law firm supplies every technical incident-response service.

The firm’s stated crisis role includes shaping the client’s position on information preservation, disclosure and lines of defence.

These subjects are handled within the coordinated response. This description does not prescribe what a particular client must retain or disclose, to whom, or by when; those decisions require legal assessment of the facts and applicable obligations.

The firm describes coordinating between the legal team, communications advisers and management.

The purpose is to shape the client’s position across the same event, including preservation, disclosure and defence questions. The published approach does not treat public communications as a substitute for legal or factual assessment.

The firm describes using its technology to process large volumes of information as part of a senior-led legal response.

The objective is to support decisions when the situation does not fit a standard category and time is limited. Response arrangements and timing for a particular matter must be agreed directly; this page does not create an around-the-clock service commitment.