By: Fern Sidman

Israel’s flagship carrier, EL AL Israel Airlines, is facing a legal and reputational crisis of unprecedented scale, with a newly filed class action lawsuit accusing the airline of systematically exploiting its wartime monopoly to impose inflated ticket prices during the Iron Swords war. As VIN News reported on Wednesday, the plaintiffs are seeking 600 million shekels (approximately $169 million USD) in damages, arguing that EL AL took advantage of Israel’s state of emergency following the October 7th Hamas massacre to generate excessive profits at the expense of consumers desperate to fly.

Filed in an Israeli court by attorney Ilan Vardnikov of the Pearl Cohen law firm—alongside legal scholars Dr. Tal Rotman and Adi Tzitron—the lawsuit is fortified by damning economic testimony from Prof. David Gilo, former Director-General of the Israel Competition Authority. Gilo’s findings reveal a disturbing pattern: while foreign carriers withdrew services, EL AL rapidly expanded its market share and leveraged its near-total control to hike ticket prices far beyond what operating costs would justify.

According to figures cited by in the VIN News report, EL AL’s net profit in 2024 surged to $554 million, a figure that climbs to $771 million after adjustments—by far the airline’s best financial year in over 15 years. For comparison, EL AL posted a net profit of just $113 million in 2023. These numbers suggest a nearly sevenfold increase in profitability amid a national crisis.

As the report at VIN News explained, the source of these profits was not innovation or efficiency, but a vacuum left by foreign airlines. In the wake of the Hamas attacks on October 7, nearly all major international and low-cost carriers—including United, Lufthansa, British Airways, and Wizz Air—suspended or drastically curtailed service to Israel. This left EL AL as the de facto monopoly, operating routes to and from Ben-Gurion Airport with little to no competition.

The lawsuit identifies that EL AL gained monopolistic dominance over 20 of 24 examined flight routes, commanding a market share above 50% on many. Israir Airlines, in its own filings, corroborated the collapse in competition, stating that “many flights by foreign companies to and from Israel were canceled until further notice,” a development which forced passengers to rely almost entirely on EL AL.

What makes the lawsuit particularly explosive, as noted in the VIN News report, is the allegation that EL AL raised ticket prices despite decreasing costs. Prof. Gilo’s analysis shows that EL AL’s operating expenses dropped by 3% in 2024 compared to 2023, and by 11% compared to 2022. Meanwhile, ticket prices rose by an average of 14.3%, and profit per passenger kilometer soared by 1500%.

“There was no increase in EL AL’s costs justifying the increase in flight prices,” Gilo states in the suit, according to the report at VIN News. “Surplus revenues rolled directly to the profit line.”

Even more striking are the comparisons with global industry benchmarks. EL AL’s 28.5% profit per passenger kilometer—which increased to nearly 35% when bonuses were included—was nearly five times the global average of 6.1%, according to IATA data. The airline’s return on active capital reached 37.8%, significantly exceeding its weighted cost of capital and far surpassing international norms.

“These are not the financials of a company merely surviving a crisis,” remarked one aviation analyst interviewed by VIN News. “These are the numbers of a company that used its dominant position to pursue unrestrained profit.”

While the Israel Competition Authority and the Consumer Protection and Fair Trade Authority have opened inquiries, the VIN News report emphasized that current Israeli law lacks provisions for mandatory financial restitution in cases such as this. The plaintiffs argue that the court must intervene to prevent similar abuses in future national emergencies.

“Compensating EL AL customers is just, fair, and required,” the suit states. “Without it, there can be no future deterrence against abuse of monopolistic market power during wartime, distress, and national crisis.”

At stake is more than financial compensation. Legal experts cited by VIN News believe the outcome of this case could set a critical precedent for corporate responsibility in times of national trauma, especially for companies that operate with quasi-governmental status and play central roles in public infrastructure.

In a brief statement to media outlets, including VIN News, EL AL acknowledged awareness of the lawsuit but declined to comment in detail. “After it is received, the company will study the petition and submit its response to the court as required,” the airline said. “It should be clarified that the company acted and acts by the law, including regarding flight prices.”

Despite the legal disclaimer, public sentiment may prove harder to navigate. As the VIN News report noted, the lawsuit has already generated a storm of outrage among Israeli citizens—particularly families of reservists, evacuees, and dual nationals who paid steep prices to travel during wartime.

Social media reactions to the VIN News coverage of the story have been swift and emotional. “We were fleeing rockets. EL AL was cashing in,” wrote one commenter. Others have demanded a boycott until the airline issues refunds or changes its pricing model.

Whether the courts will compel EL AL to return profits to affected passengers remains uncertain. However, as VIN News argued in its editorial analysis, the legal battle is likely to reignite the broader debate about the privatization of essential services, wartime profiteering, and the role of corporate ethics in national resilience.

“EL AL was a lifeline for many Israelis during Iron Swords,” one columnist observed, “but lifelines should not come with price tags inflated by monopoly math.”

As Israel continues to navigate a period of prolonged instability—with the ongoing threat of war in the north and partial recovery from the October 7 tragedy—the outcome of this landmark case may well shape how future crises are managed in the skies, and on the balance sheets.