Senior partner files lawsuit against Apax Partners alleging toxic work environment and public humiliation rituals

Senior partner Erez Nahum files a lawsuit against Apax Partners Israel head Zehavit Cohen, alleging a toxic environment and professional humiliation rituals.

By: AXL Media

Published: Feb 24, 2026, 3:50 AM EST

Source: The information in this article was sourced from CTech - https://www.calcalistech.com/ctechnews/article/rk00rs79ubl

Allegations of Systematic Professional Humiliation

The legal complaint filed by Erez Nahum includes dozens of documented WhatsApp messages that purportedly illustrate a disturbing management style at the firm. Nahum describes a work environment where "humiliation rituals" were utilized as a tool for staff management. One specific message cited in the lawsuit allegedly shows Zehavit Cohen discussing an employee and suggesting a public ceremony to maximize the individual's embarrassment. These allegations suggest that the firm’s leadership intentionally fostered an atmosphere of fear and public degradation rather than professional collaboration.

Documented Verbal Abuse and Toxicity

Beyond specific rituals, the lawsuit paints a picture of a daily operations landscape defined by shouting, profanity, and constant hostility. Nahum alleges that the toxic environment was not isolated to a few incidents but was a consistent characteristic of Cohen’s leadership style in the Israeli office. The filing claims that such behavior was used to maintain control and silence dissent among the senior ranks of the private equity fund. This legal challenge marks a significant rare public glimpse into the internal dynamics of one of the region's most prominent investment entities.

Retaliation and Internal Governance Failures

The plaintiff asserts that his attempts to address these cultural issues were met with severe professional retaliation. The lawsuit claims that governance bodies within Apax Partners failed to intervene or provide oversight despite the severity of the reported conduct. Nahum suggests that the lack of internal checks allowed the alleged abusive behavior to continue unchecked for an extended period. This failure in corporate governance is a central pillar of the legal argument, highlighting the risks associated with concentrated power in regional investment offices.