Question:

 

What is recommended when one party really wants to divorce and the other wants ‘Shlom Bayit’?

 

Answer:

 

Before legal proceedings are started, it is preferable for the couple to go for marriage counselling to ascertain what is really best. The counselling process itself will create the conditions necessary for testing the best course of action for both parties – going through it will enable them to decide whether it is best to reconcile the marriage or end it.

Question:

 

What is the attitude of the rabbinical courts when one party in a second marriage wants divorce, and the other side files for marital reconciliation ?

 

Answer:

 

The rabbinical courts do not make an effort to encourage marital reconciliation where parties both marry second time round, especially where the marriages are short. The rabbinical courts do not hold up much hope for saving such unions, and are quick to see through pleas for 'shalom bayit '(marital reconciliation) where they are filed for tactical (usually financial) reasons. These points were stressed by the Greater Rabbinical (Appeal) Court in February 2007 in a divorce case concerning a man and a wife who had each married for the second time round.

 

" Second unions are not a clean slate. There is a serious risk of marital breakdown – as it is known a not small portion of them do not last . Additionally, each of the parties has his/her own family history and where there are grown up children , there is concern for their welfare….usually it is the practice of the rabbinical courts not to make an effort for marital reconciliation, concerning second unions, and especially where marriages which have only lasted for short periods are concerned. The chance of change is very slim and where those marriages breakdown, there is almost no chance to rehabilitate them," it said.

 

Question:

 

How does one start off the divorce process in Israel if both parties are Jews ?

 

Answer:

 

The party wishing to initiate the divorce should file for divorce at the rabbinical court if the other party is not willing to divorce. If, however, the other party is willing to divorce, then they can file a joint application to divorce in which case the process will be much quicker as there will be no need to prove grounds for ending the marriage according to Jewish law.

 

 

Question :

 

I have filed my husband for divorce at the rabbinate due to his extra-marital affairs. He left a message on my answer- phone jeering that I would be an ‘aguna’ (abandoned wife) and that he was planning to leave on a world tour with his lover. Can I stop him ?

 

Answer:

 

Yes. Under the Rabbinical Courts ( Obedience Enforcement ) Act of 1956 if a rabbinical court considers that the wife has brought credible evidence and has a good chance of succeeding in her divorce plea , then it can grant an order preventing the husband from leaving Israel if there is a substantial risk that his departure would result in the wife becoming an ‘aguna’.

 

 

 

Question: 

 

My husband and I are both Jewish but we got married in a civil ceremony abroad out of choice because we are both very secular. We are considering divorce . Do we have to go to the rabbinate if we want to organize the divorce here . in Israel?

 

Answer:

 

Yes, if you want to divorce in Israel. The Rabbinical Courts have exclusive jurisdiction on matters of marriage and divorce between two Jews who are residents or citizens of Israel, no matter where or in what kind of ceremony they married. Although Jewish law only recognizes a Jewish religious marriage as valid a Jewish couple who married in a civil ceremony abroad will still have to go through the rabbinate to get a special kind of divorce to erase any doubt . You also need this if you wish to remarry, according to Jewish law.

 

Question:

 

Can a rabbinical court cancel a civil marriage performed abroad between two Jews ?

 

Answer:

 

No ! Even though a rabbinical court in Israel will not recognize such a union as being valid, it has no jurisdiction to cancel it. A similar result, however, can be achieved by asking the rabbinical court in Israel to pass a judgment declaring both the parties as being free to marry under Jewish law. In practice, however, as the marriage abroad is still likely to leave some doubt about whether the parties "dedicated themselves" to one another, to be on the safe side the rabbinical court is likely to give instructions for the preparation of a 'get' (Jewish divorce).

Question:

 

Which court in Israel will deal with my divorce if my husband and I married in a Conservative Synagogue in the U.K before we made "Aliyah" ?

 

Answer:

 

Only the Rabbinical Court (Orthodox ) which is the only official or recognized religious court for Jews in Israel.

Question:

 

I married in a Reform Synagogue in England. and divorced under U.K. law.

I now live in Israel and wish to re-marry someone Jewish here. Do I need

to go to the Rabbinate here in Israel – my 'ex' back in the U.K. says she will co-operate if I need her help ?

 

Answer:

 

Yes – you will need a Jewish religious divorce from the Rabbinical Court

(Orthodox) in order to be able to remarry under Jewish law. Mutual consent is sufficient grounds and a special rabbinical procedure can be arranged which allows for the divorce ceremony to take place without you both having to be present and meet. 

 

 

Jewish Divorce Via Messenger

Mistake In ‘Get’ (Jewish Divorce )

Husband Cancels Consent–Messenger on Way.

 

 

Question:

 

How can an Israeli citizen living abroad get divorced from his Jewish wife without flying over to Israel where she lives, if she agrees ?

 

Answer:

 

Presuming there is mutual consent or a valid divorce judgment from a rabbinical court having jurisdiction over the matter, depending on the circumstances, the divorce deed itself (the ‘get’) can be drawn up abroad, if there is a rabbinical court in that country which the Chief Rabbinate in Israel recognises as having jurisdiction . The husband can then give the ‘get’ to a 'sending’ messenger of the rabbinical court who, acting on his behalf, can physically hand it over to his wife in Israel, or to a special ‘acceptance’ messenger representing her, either in Israel or abroad.

 

The actual technical steps must be followed properly for the divorce to be recognised in Israel, otherwise the husband could find himself in the unfortunate position of thinking he is divorced, getting married again, this time abroad and then risk facing criminal charges in Israel for bigamy. This is what happened in the case of singer Matti Caspi who was found guilty of bigamy by Tel Aviv Magistrate’s Court in February 2002.

 

Question:

 

If a Jewish couple married in a civil wedding ceremony in the States and later in a traditional religious one in Israel where can or should they divorce if she remains abroad and he has returned home to Israel ?

 

Answer:

 

Firstly, it is preferable for a couple in this situation to have both a civil and a religious divorce and be regarded as legally divorced in both countries. If not, one of them might wish to remarry and then discover that he/she was still regarded as married in one of the countries.

 

Regarding the religious divorce or “get” a rabbinical court in Israel has exclusive jurisdiction to decide on the divorce of two Jews who are citizens or residents of Israel wherever they got married in the world, and no matter in what ceremony.

 

On the civil front, the couple should go through the civil divorce procedure according to the American state in which they married.

 

 

Question:

 

Will the fact that a court abroad has granted a civil divorce have any effect on divorce proceedings between the couple in an Israeli rabbinical court ?

 

 

Answer:

 

No – according to the Supreme Court of Justice ruling in the Ron petition case. There it was held: “ It should be stated that the fact that the court in New York ordered the couple to be divorced does not have any influence on the proceedings before the rabbinical court in Israel, as the civil divorce order given in the United States, does not have the power to dissolve the Jewish marriage of the couple” .

Question:

 

I am separated and have live abroad with the children for some time now . My husband still lives in Israel. We are both Jewish. It looks as if he will finally file for divorce at the rabbinical court in Israel. Does this mean that it will automatically hear the case for child custody ?

 

Answer:

 

Not necessarily, due to amendments to Israeli law that came into force on 10th August 2005, regarding the Rabbinical Courts (Marriage & Divorce) Act of 1953. Prior to the changes this legislation gave the rabbinical court extra-territorial jurisdiction over divorce between Jews who had a connection to Israel (via citizenship or residency), irrespective of where they married and the kind of ceremony they had. Once divorce was filed, custody was automatically bound to the plea, and other issues like property and maintenance could also be bound.

 

Under the new law, the exclusive jurisdiction given to the rabbinical court concerning Jews who were citizens or residents of Israel regarding divorce has been amended, so that it only applies in one of six specific situations. The rabbinical court will only have exclusive jurisdiction over a divorce plea between Jews who married according to Jewish law, if one of the following situations applies:

(1)the defendant's centre of life/place of habitual residence is in Israel;

(2)both parties are Israeli citizens;

(3)the Plaintiff's centre of life/place of habitual residence is in Israel, and he has lived in Israel for at least a year prior to the plea;

(4)the plaintiff's centre of life/place of habitual residence is in Israel and the parties' last joint place of domicile was in Israel;

(5)the plaintiff is an Israeli citizen, and his/her life is centred in Israel or he/she is habitually resident in Israel.

(6)the plaintiff is an Israeli citizen and has lived in Israel for one of the last two years preceding the filing of the plea.

 

Furthermore, once the rabbinical court has decided that the amendments apply , and the court has restricted jurisdiction over the divorce, then issues like custody, property and maintenance cannot be bound, as before, according to the amendments . Thus, the family court in Israel or the appropriate court abroad will have jurisdiction.

 

The changes apply to divorce pleas which were pending at the rabbinical court when they came into force , on 10/8/05.

Question:

 

If my spouse finally agrees to sign a divorce agreement how can this actually be enforced so that I will be divorced under Jewish law ?

 

Answer:

 

For Jews often the most problematic area of a divorce agreement for Jews concerns the divorce itself . Firstly, if they submit the signed divorce agreement covering issues such as child custody, maintenance and property , for authorisation at the family court all the other issues can be incorporated into a judgment , given them full legal validity, but the paragraph(s) relating to the divorce itself cannot be touched. Divorce between Jews is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the rabbinical court. Therefore, the part of the divorce agreement relating to divorce can only be authorised by a rabbinical court, where a divorce judgment can be given. Some parties authorise the whole agreement at the rabbinical court.

Secondly, although mutual consent is a ground for divorce under Jewish law the actual agreement to divorce cannot be enforced because this could interfere with the ‘get’ process. A ‘get’ (Jewish divorce deed) must be given and accepted with full consent and out of free choice.

 

In exceptional circumstances, use is made of sanctions against a husband who refuses to give his wife a divorce but only a ‘get’ given with full consent and out of free choice has legal validity.

Question:

 

What is the position when a couple agree to divorce – and the 'get' at the rabbinate goes ahead – but it transpires that the wife tricked the husband into divorcing in their divorce agreement dealing with finances which was authorized at the family court ?

 

Answer:

 

When there is a breach of a divorce agreement upon the basis of which the husband agreed to give his wife a 'get' there are " weighty questions of Jewish law concerning the validity of the divorce" , held Tel Aviv District rabbinical court in November 2005. It held that breach of the divorce agreement can lead to the 'get' (Jewish divorce) being invalid.

 

Where a divorce agreement – covering finance amongst other matters - is made and the 'get ceremony' follows, it was held that if the wife had already made up her mind at the 'get' ceremony not to honour the agreement , and if the husband had known this at the time and would not have given her the 'get' as a result of this, then their divorce would be one obtained by deception and invalid. However, if the husband had said he would divorce his wife without any conditions, then the 'get' would be valid. The question of whether the financial aspects of the divorce agreement had been breached would be question for the family court, if it authorized the relevant sections, it held.

Question:

 

I converted to Judaism in order to marry my husband in a Jewish ceremony . We have a baby and are now in the process of divorce. I have heard about the forged conversion scandal and suspect something fishy because my conversion papers came through very quickly . As a new immigrant I let him ‘take care’ of everything. If my documents are ‘forged’ what implications would this have for me if I want to divorce ?

 

Answer:

 

Basically if conversion papers are forgeries then this would mean that a woman in this situation would not be Jewish and her marriage would be void if she ‘married’ in a Jewish ceremony. If this were so, then there would be no need for her to obtain a divorce. She would be entitled to file for custody and maintenance for any minor child,and division of property at the family court. This was the conclusion to be drawn from a case heard by the Tel Aviv Family Court in March 2002 involving the ‘divorce’ of a Jewish immigrant whose conversion papers were found to be forgeries .

 

The woman, a Belgian Christian, had married a Jewish Israeli, according to Jewish law, in Israel, after a supposedly Orthodox conversion. They had two children, and moved to Belgium where they divorced according to Jewish law. A judgment authorising a one-sided divorce agreement detrimental to the ‘wife’ – which gave her husband custody and deprived her of her property rights under civil law - was made by a rabbinical court in Israel. After the divorce, while trying to alter her status at the Ministry of the Interior, the wife claimed she discovered that she was not registered as a Jew and her conversion papers had been forged.

 

In response, she filed three pleas at the family court. The first plea was a declaratory judgment declaring , amongst other points that (1) she is not Jewish (2) that her marriage was void according to Jewish law (3)her ‘divorce’ agreement was void (4) she had property rights of a common-law wife . The second plea was for child custody and the third for permission to bring up her minor children abroad.

 

The husband argued that the Family Court had no jurisdiction to hear the pleas , as this lay with the rabbinical court. The wife claimed that the rabbinical court had no jurisdiction because she was not Jewish as the conversion documents were not genuine.

 

In its judgment the family court held that it lacked jurisdiction to rule on the status issues raised – e.g. the conversion and the marriage . It, held, however that it could decide on them for the purposes of ruling on other issues within its jurisdiction. According to Israeli civil law, the forged conversion lacked validity and even if it were later held that it still had religious validity, it took away the rabbinical court’s jurisdiction.

 

 

Question :

 

My husband and I lived together in the South . We split up, I moved back to the Galilee kibbutz where I grew up and he went to live with his family in the north. We want to divorce. When I enquired I was told that the divorce plea has to be filed at the rabbinical court where we last lived together. Is this so, or can it be made at a location more convenient to both of us, in the north ?

 

Answer:

 

Yes, quite possibly ! In principle the Rabbinical Court Regulations states that pleas between spouses are to be made at the district rabbinical court in the area where they live or last lived together. However, the regulations also state that an agreement can be made regarding local jurisdiction . Thus a husband and wife who no longer live together and who have moved to a different part/s of the country can decide on a mutually- convenient geographical location . The rabbinical court at which they choose to file their plea reserves the right not to accept its jurisdiction even where the sides have made an agreement, but it must give reasons.

 

 

Question :

 

Can a rabbinical court order "Shlom Bayit" (marital reconciliation ) and not at a hearing because the husband asks the wife, to forgive him for being violent, and Jewish law obliges her to accept his apology ? 

 

Answer:

 

Yes, in certain circumstances, but no, in others. Although proven violence is a ground for divorce under Jewish law, if the husband files for ‘shlom bayit’ (marital re-conciliation) at the rabbinical court, it has discretion over the matter. It can order him to divorce, recommend him to do so, or even order marital re-conciliation, depending on its perception of the circumstances .

 

In 2002 the Greater Rabbinical Court rejected the appeal by a violent husband against a district rabbinical court judgment ordering him to divorce. He was serving a prison sentence for attacking his wife and yet appealed, pleading ‘Shlom Bayit’. He apologized to his wife and the appeal court for his violent behaviour and promised to mend his ways. The Greater Rabbinical Court, however, held that the case was extreme, and the wife had suffered physical and emotional violence throughout their two-year marriage to the ‘evil’ husband. He had been given several chances to mend his ways but had not, it held, stiffening the judgment, saying that if he did not divorce her within 30 days he would be sent to prison for 5 years, under the 1995 Rabbinical Court (Implementation of Divorce Judgment) Law.

 

 

Question:

 

Will a rabbinical court dealing with a plea to oblige or compel a party to divorce allow him/her to condition his/her consent on the other agreeing to forego child custody ?

 

Answer:

 

No – Custody claims are independent and should not be given any weight in a divorce hearing over whether to oblige or compel a party to divorce, according to a Greater Rabbinical Curt ruling.

 

Question:

 

Does a woman who converts to Judaism but marries only in a civil ceremony abroad and not in a religious ceremony need a ‘get’ to marry under Jewish law ?

 

Answer:

 

Much depends on the particular circumstances. Normally two Jews who marry in a civil ceremony abroad still have to go through the rabbinical court if they wish to divorce as a ‘doubting’ get may be required. However, In 2000 Tel Aviv Rabbinical Court held hat a woman who had converted to Judaism but who had married in a civil ceremony abroad did not need a ‘get’ although she had been filing for one from overseas for over 20 years.

 

It held that two assumptions regarding the existence of marriage according to Jewish law did not apply. Firstly, the assumption that she was the defendant’s wife did not apply as they had not married in a Jewish religious ceremony . Secondly, the assumption that their intimate relationship was not casual did not apply . The fact that they had children together proved intimacy – but as the man had cohabited with other women , and abandoned them, too, this showed instability and there was no need for a ‘doubting get’ . The woman was free to marry any Jew except a Cohen under Jewish law, as she was a convert, it was held.

Question:

 

How can a party proceed with divorce if the other spouse denies that their private wedding ceremony took place,and claims the ‘Ketuba’ is a forgery ?

 

Answer:

 

If there were guests who were present at the alleged marriage ceremony then they can give evidence as to its existence. This happened in an unusual case before the Rehovot Rabbinical Court in May 2003 where the wife wanted to divorce because of her husband’s adultery . The wife claimed they were married in a private ceremony before two witnesses . The husband, who entered the court room waving a document from the Interior Ministry where he was registered as single, denied this and refused to give the court contact numbers of his relatives that she said attended. The rabbinical court eventually issued orders compelling them to attend and they verified the wife’s version of events. The husband then admitted that he had married his wife in a private ceremony and that he had committed adultery.

 

The rabbinical court held that the couple were married and passed a divorce judgment based on the husband’s admission of adultery . In the light of his non-attendance at part of the previous hearings, the rabbinical court gave an order for him to attend the divorce ceremony . It also held that it would consider awarding costs against him for prolonging the process and not attending some of the hearings.

 

Question :

 

I am considering divorce and want to know what my obligations will be afterwards towards my ex-wife and our children. I agree that she should have custody of the children as they are young. We are both Jewish.

 

Answer:

 

Under Jewish law once a man is divorced he is under no financial obligation to support his ex-wife, though he can agree to do so. He is obliged to give her maintenance during the marriage if they were married in a Jewish religious ceremony.

 

Regarding the children, Jewish law places the burden of child maintenance on the father, solely until the minors are 15, at which point the mother may have to participate ,until they are 18, depending on the circumstances. During compulsory army service a child is still entitled to some maintenance.

 

In relation to other financial committments, it depends on whether the husband and wife make an agreement covering property or whether the court decides to divide up your marital property for them.

  

 

Question:

 

My husband and I are Jewish and I am considering divorce. Would I have any financial claims against him after divorce ?

 

Answer:

 

You would have no right to maintenance from him once you divorce. Under Jewish law he is obliged to support you as long as you are married even if you are separated if there is a legally justifiable reason for this. Sometimes a man agrees to support his wife financially after divorce – in his divorce agreement - but he is under no obligation to do so.

 

Regarding property rights and divorce see Property Rights & Agreements sections. Sometimes a wife is unaware that she is entitled to some of her ex-husband’s pension rights/social benefits.

 

 

Question:

 

I know my wife has been having an affair with a friend of mine who is divorced. I am so hurt by this and want a divorce. Can I prevent my wife from marrying this man ?

 

Answer:

 

Yes – if adultery is proved! The rabbinical court can forbid a woman from marrying a specific man, and stating this outright in the divorce judgment, if adultery is proved. If intimate relations are not properly proved, this can be one of the reasons for challenging such a ban, as was the case in August 2004 when divorcee and her alleged lover successfully petitioned the Supreme Court of Justice against a ban on their marriage by the Haifa Rabbinical Court. Although a report made by a private investigator concerning the alleged relations between the two petitioners had been presented to the rabbinical court, the detective himself had not given testimony in person, and no pictures were shown, although they were referred to. Furthermore, the alleged lover had not been present when the decision was made, and had not been given an opportunity to challenge the scanty evidence.

 

These flaws were just some of many found by the Supreme Court of Justice, which cancelled the ban, holding that the rabbinical court had lacked the jurisdiction to make it.

 

Question:

 

Is it possible that the date on which a divorce agreement is signed or authorized is actual later than the date on which the parties, both Jews, actually divorced in a ceremony according to law ?

 

Answer:

 

Yes, in certain circumstances, although normally the divorce agreement comes before the ceremony itself. Jewish couples reaching an agreement over divorce usually submit it to the rabbinical court for authorization at a hearing, and incorporation into a divorce judgment first. A date is then set for the divorce ceremony itself. However, where there is a dispute between the parties, usually over custody or property, the rabbinical court can ‘manipulate’ the parties positively and suggest they reverse the order – and divorce first and get the problem solved later, either by the rabbinical court ruling on it, or by the parties agreeing to the rabbinical court deciding on the outstanding issue in dispute. This is to avoid the undesired situation where the rabbinical court issues a divorce judgment – but then finds that one party who feels hard done by refuses to co-operate in the actual divorce ceremony. According to Jewish law, there must be mutual consent and free will on the part of both parties i.e. the man has to give the wife the ‘get’ (divorce document) willingly and she must accept it willingly for the divorce to be valid.

 

 

 

Question:

 

Can a foreign resident – who refuses to divorce - be prevented from leaving Israel by a rabbinical court if he arrives on a visit, and his wife is also a foreign resident ?

 

Answer:

 

Quite possibly, depending on the circumstances,according to a controversial precedent set by Jerusalem Greater Rabbinical Court in June 2004. It rejected an appeal by the husband, a French citizen, visiting Israel to cancel an order made by Jerusalem District Rabbinical Court which prevented him from leaving the country at the end of a visit at Passover. His wife, a Moroccan citizen, had filed pleas for divorce and maintenance there . The couple had married in both Jewish religious and civil wedding ceremonies in Monaco, where they were resident, and where they had been living separately for seven years and had divorced according to civil law. The Jerusalem District rabbinical court had held that it had jurisdiction over the wife’s maintenance, and could , therefore, prevent the husband from leaving the country, although it admitted that the question of its jurisdiction over the divorce was problematic.

 

Fearing becoming an “aguna” and unable to marry, the wife started proceedings in Israel in 2003 after her divorce plea at the rabbinical court in Paris produced no progress. At a hearing before both parties at the district rabbinical court in connection with the exit order, the husband argued that it had no jurisdiction to grant it as neither of them were citizens or residents of Israel, or had any connection with the country. He argued that the wife filed the pleas in bad faith, and that Monaco was a more appropriate forum for proceedings. Subsequently, however, after the parties had agreed to submit written summaries , the wife produced evidence from the Jewish Agency in Paris that she had applied to emigrate to Israel eleven days after the hearing, and had applied for a visa as a temporary resident.

 

Reaffirming Israeli rabbinical court jurisdiction over the wife’s maintenance, and the legality of the exit order, the appeal court stated : “ …. it transpires that the husband arrives in Israel from time to time. The husband attests to being a religious person. He lays tefillin. He prays three times a day… that is a deep connection to Israel ! …. Every Jew has a connection to Israel. A Jew who declares himself to be a religious Jew, and that is enough. The husband himself said that he visited the house of …… in Jerusalem to discuss the conflict he had with his wife with him. Although the matter was done within the framework of a private meeting, it is clear that this fact strengthens the connection with Israel.”

 

Furthermore, it rejected the “inappropriate forum” argument, partly, it said, because the only forum where the wife could get maintenance under Jewish law was Israel: “But if we were persuaded that the husband was willing to be judged in a plea against him at the rabbinical court with jurisdiction in France, we would seriously consider accepting his appeal.”