This page explains, from an ophthalmologist’s point of view, how vision disability is assessed in a civil proceeding — how it differs from a proceeding before a medical board, which questions recur in eye files, and what an opinion needs in order to withstand testing.
For general background on ophthalmic opinions see Expert Medical Opinion in Ophthalmology; for the statutory routes see Ophthalmic Opinion for Bituach Leumi and Ophthalmic Opinion for the Ministry of Defence.
No board — evidence instead
The central difference is simple but decisive. Before National Insurance or the Rehabilitation Department a board sits, examines the applicant and decides. In a civil proceeding there is no board: the opinion is evidence submitted to the court, weighed against the rest of the material, and the expert may be cross-examined on it.
Two practical consequences follow. First, every statement in the opinion must be traceable back to a document or an examination, not to an impression. Second, internal inconsistency, however small, is the point at which an opinion breaks.
Medical and functional disability — two different questions
Medical disability is the extent of the impairment in medical terms, under accepted disability tests. Functional disability is a separate question: how far the impairment actually affects this person’s functioning and earning capacity in their occupation.
In ophthalmology the gap between the two is especially visible. Loss of vision in one eye may yield a relatively moderate medical percentage and still close off an occupation that demands binocular vision, a full visual field, work at height, operating machinery or professional driving. A medical opinion describes the objective limitation flowing from the impairment; the functional conclusion is drawn by the court on the whole of the evidence. The explanation here is general and is not legal advice.
Road accidents — a separate route
In claims under the Road Accident Victims Compensation Law the medical evidence is not submitted by the parties but comes from an expert appointed by the court. Regulation 9(b) of the experts regulations further provides that the appointed expert shall not request or accept medical opinions from the parties.
No private party-instructed opinion is therefore offered in this area. The relevant route is appointment by the court.
Which eye files recur in civil proceedings
Outside the road accident route, the injuries that recur are largely anterior segment injuries: ocular trauma, a foreign body, a chemical or thermal burn, a corneal scar, and damage following occupational exposure. In each of them the decisive documentation is similar:
- Best corrected visual acuity, preferably from more than one date, to show a stable state.
- A reliable visual field test where the impairment concerns the field — the most common weak point, and the first place a counter-opinion will attack.
- Corneal documentation: imaging, topography, and a located description of the scar and its relation to the visual axis.
- Separation of a pre-existing state from new damage where that distinction is relevant.
- A chronological sequence from the event to the present.
Work for both sides, and court appointment
Ophthalmic assessment is carried out for both sides — claimants on one hand, defendants and insurers on the other — including a critical review of an existing opinion: whether the finding matches the clause chosen, whether the visual field tests are reliable, and whether the weighting and ceiling rules were applied correctly.
Appointment as a court expert in ophthalmology is also possible, as is an assessment or counter-opinion for law firms. The method of examination is identical in every case; the identity of the instructing party does not alter it.
How to make contact
Examinations and assessments take place in Haifa and Herzliya by prior appointment. There is no need to send a full file at first contact — a short description of the injury, the type of proceeding and the stage it has reached is enough to check whether the case fits an assessment within the field of expertise. Every enquiry is considered on its merits, with no undertaking as to a conclusion or to the outcome of the proceeding.
Get in touch to check suitability for an assessment
Frequently asked questions
How does a civil claim differ from a National Insurance medical board?
In a civil proceeding there is no board that examines the injured person and decides. The medical opinion is evidence submitted to the court and tested as evidence — it is read, weighed against the rest of the material, and the expert may be cross-examined on it. The practical consequence is that the level of detail and internal consistency matter more here than before a board, and that an opinion not grounded in documentation will not survive confrontation with opposing material.
What is the difference between medical and functional disability?
Medical disability is the extent of the impairment in medical terms, under accepted disability tests. Functional disability is a different question — how far the impairment actually affects this person's functioning and earning capacity in their occupation. A medical opinion addresses medical disability and can describe the objective limitations flowing from the impairment, but the functional conclusion is drawn by the court on the whole of the evidence. This explanation is general and is not legal advice.
Can a private opinion be filed in a road accident case?
No. In claims under the Road Accident Victims Compensation Law the medical evidence comes from an expert appointed by the court, and regulation 9(b) of the experts regulations even bars that appointed expert from requesting or accepting medical opinions from the parties. No private opinion is therefore offered in this area; the relevant route is appointment by the court.
Which book of tests is used to assess vision disability in a civil case?
In practice the National Insurance disability tests are commonly used as the yardstick for the degree of medical disability, even where the proceeding is not against National Insurance. In ophthalmology this means the same rules recur: best corrected visual acuity, the clause 52 table, and the weighting and ceiling rules. The difference between the books can be seen in the [eye disability calculator](/en/disability-calculator/).
Are opinions provided for the defendant or the insurer as well?
Yes. Ophthalmic assessment is carried out for both sides — for claimants on one hand and for defendants or insurers on the other — including a critical review of an existing opinion: whether the finding fits the clause chosen, whether the visual field tests are reliable, and whether the weighting rules were applied correctly. The identity of the instructing party does not change the method of examination or the conclusion.
Can you be appointed as an expert by the court?
Yes. Appointment as a court expert in ophthalmology is possible, as is an assessment or a counter-opinion for law firms. In every case an opinion presents findings and a medical conclusion; it does not guarantee an outcome in the proceeding.