The settlement between Ofir Birenbaum and Cairo Takeaway, which was ultimately reached in late March, was meant to put an end to a high-profile, messy dispute that had embarrassed people on both sides and thrust a small Newtown restaurant into a global news cycle it never requested. The March 30 joint statement was cautious. measured. In essence, it stated that no one prevailed. That was the idea. It was roughly as long as it took for someone to pick up their phone.
Ofir Birenbaum shared his own account of what happened on the same day that the joint statement was made public. According to him, “the Truth wins.” He called himself “completely vindicated.” He gestured to “lies” being spread about him. In a statement, his attorney, Rebekah Giles, described the result as “an important win” for Birenbaum and a vindication “for Jews across the globe.” She went on to say that “a lesser man would have cut his losses and walked away.”All of this was read by Federal Court Justice Robert Bromwich. He didn’t find it impressive.
Birenbaum violated the confidential settlement deed, according to a ruling rendered by Bromwich on Tuesday. According to the judge, the public statements were “highly misleading and even deceptive”—not just a matter of emphasis or spin, but a conscious attempt to change the public’s perception of what had actually been agreed. The joint statement was “a true compromise,” according to Bromwich. Something more akin to a trophy presentation was evident in the personal statements.
Reading the ruling gives the impression that the court has witnessed similar situations in the past: a settlement that was signed in good faith but was subtly undone by one party as soon as the ink dried. Bromwich told it like it was. He claimed that Birenbaum “intentionally set out, in a planned way, to undermine and overwhelm the contents and effect of the joint statement through his own conduct and via Ms. Giles.”” In a legal ruling, that word—intentionally—carries weight.
Here, the backstory is important. In February 2025, Birenbaum went to Cairo Takeaway with Daily Telegraph journalists while sporting a Star of David cap and necklace. According to reports, the operation was internally referred to as “undercover Jew.” It didn’t work out. Birenbaum claimed that social media posts made by the restaurant’s owner, Hesham El Masry, and a staff member were defamatory. He filed a lawsuit. In the end, the restaurant apologized and removed the posts. The joint statement, the settlement, and the statements that the court subsequently deemed deceptive followed.
The court also discovered that before the joint statement was made public, Giles or someone working on her behalf had prepared and distributed a briefing note to reporters at the Daily Mail, Crikey, Sky News, and several right-wing commentators. In a segment on Sky News, host Sharri Markson revealed that Birenbaum had received compensation. Bromwich discovered that Giles communicated information on Birenbaum’s behalf to Markson or another member of the network.
For his part, El Masry stated that he accepted the compromise because he didn’t want the dispute to get worse. With the joint statement, he had hoped to bring back “some harmony in the community.” He claimed to be “bitterly disappointed” that it wasn’t given the same consideration on the other side.
It’s difficult to ignore the fact that both sides had genuine interests at stake during the trial. Bromwich noted that if the case had gone to trial, Birenbaum’s reputational risk might have outweighed the damage from the initial social media posts. According to any interpretation, the settlement also served his interests.
It remains to be seen if any of that resonates with the individuals involved. Following the decision on Tuesday, Birenbaum stated that he is still “happy with the terms” of the resolution. The costs have not yet been established. It appears that the court proceedings are still ongoing, but they are currently more subdued than they were a few days ago.
