This section deals with the maintenance liability,of fathers towards their children, and also of other relatives e.g. grandparents when a father fails to fulfil to support them financially. It also deals with questions relevant to a person against whom a maintenance plea has been filed.
Short Deadline To File Maintenance Defence
Question:
I have just been filed with a maintenance plea. How soon must I file my defence ?
Answer:
Within 15 days from the time you were served with the plea.
Husband And Rough Justice At Rabbinate – Wife's Maintenance
Question:
My marriage is in a mess and I have now received a judgment from the rabbinical court ordering me my wife and our children temporary maintenance larger than my salary. But I knew nothing of all this – I didn't receive any plea or summons to a hearing. What should I do?
Answer:
Firstly, the principle of a fair hearing is a norm of advanced legal systems and part of Israeli law. It follows a normal pattern, starting with the submission of the main plea and any temporary applications to the relevant court. The defendant is served with the plea and is invited to attend the hearing set. The next stage is the preliminary hearing, where claims are made. After that, the claim must be proved, followed by the summing-up stage, either orally or in writing. Only after all this is judgment given.
If someone receives a ‘judgment’ (final stage) about ‘temporary maintenance’ (first stage) it is clear that vital stages in the process have been skipped. A person against whom a maintenance plea is made must receive a copy of it , have an opportunity to submit written defence pleadings and be invited to a hearing on the matter. Any irregularity can be challenged – firstly by applying for the cancellation of the ex-parte judgment (given in the party’s absence). If this fails the usual step is an appeal and as a last resort a petition to the Supreme Court of Justice asking it to strike down any decisions and judgments which a court had no jurisdiction to make. In extreme cases, however, a petition can be made immediately against the first-level court , without going through the appeal process.
A example of blatant irregularities in judicial procedure involved a husband who had received an ‘express’ ex-parte judgment from a rabbinical court ordering him to pay his wife and teenage daughter very high temporary maintenance – even though she had not filed for it, and before he had received any papers at all ! The wife had indeed filed for maintenance – but not temporary maintenance – and when she opened the file and asked for an early hearing date, a rabbinical court ‘judgment’ was made ordering her husband to pay several thousand shekels temporary maintenance. She then went to the Bailiff’s Office and opened a file to enforce the judgment – even before her husband knew anything about the matter !
The husband, represented by Adv. Amihoud Borochov, made a formal application to cancel the judgment. The rabbinical court said it would deal with this at the hearing. There, where it met without the required number of religious judges, it heard the sides’ oral pleas, skipped the proof stage, and, after written summations, gave a temporary decision slightly reducing the maintenance set – not a judgment, as it earlier had said it would.
As the husband decided not to bring a petition to the Supreme Court of Justice asking for it to strike down the irregular decisions and judgments the case was ended by a compromise agreement regarding maintenance.
Husband’s Freedom of Movement and Wife’s Maintenance
Question:
What must a husband prove to cancel an order granted by the family court preventing him leaving the country, at the request of his wife who filed him for maintenance there ?
Answer:
Basically a husband must persuade the family court that the basis on which it granted the order was unfounded. To be entitled to get such a temporary order the wife must bring prima facie evidence to show that she is entitled to maintenance, and that there is a real risk of her husband leaving the country permanently or for a prolonged period – and that would make substantially impede on legal proceedings, or the execution of a judgment in her favour. Even though the wife may have a right to maintenance, the husband can cancel the order if he brings suitable evidence to show he has no plans to move abroad and that any temporary absence from Israel would not have the negative effect she claims.
In March 2003 a husband managed to persuade the Kfar Saba Family Court to cancel an order preventing him leaving the country , even though his wife , who was pregnant, had a prima facie right to maintenance. He disproved her allegations of plans to move to Canada, and successfully argued that , given all the circumstances, her rights in the maintenance proceedings would not be jeopordized by the order being lifted, and that he, in fact, would have more to lose than her by leaving Israel.
Maintenance Claim & Exit Order Against Foreigners
Question:
I am a foreigner, with only temporary residence status in Israel , and my wife is Israeli. We have a young child but split up. I want to leave Israel and return to Europe. My wife says she has taken legal advice and is going to file for maintenance for her and our child – and get an order to stop me leaving Israel. Could she succeed in ‘trapping’ me here ?
Answer:
The Civil Procedure Rules of 1984 state that exit orders against foreigners should be given in extreme cases only, in ‘exceptional circumstances’ and for special grounds which must be recorded. Having said this, if your wife does file a maintenance plea against you, and gets maintenance awarded, should you not pay her, it will then be easier for her to stop you leaving the country. This is because once a maintenance case reaches the bailiff’s it has already been decided by the court , and it is just being asked to take action to enforce the judgment and ensure payment. You would then have to fight to cancel the order, and make payment/guarantee it.
Since the recognition in the 1990's of the constitutional right to freedom of movement for ‘any person’ enshrined in the Basic Law: Human Dignity & Freedom Act, Israeli courts have become more respectful of foreigners' rights. If a foreign resident has no property in Israel and his source of income is located abroad, then keeping him a ‘prisoner’ in the country seems to be illogical as it actually reduces his ability to pay off his debts in Israel. In practice, however, some of the registrars at the family courts are still hooked on the concept of conditioning freedom of movement in these cases on the provision on large financial guarantees or guarantors, something they usually apply where Israelis are involved. They do this even though the practice may be inappropriate where the person has no family, friends and shallow roots, if any, in the country to help him out in this connection.
In a 2000 case an exit order was passed by a registrar at the Tel Aviv family court against a man with dual South African and Israeli nationality as part of a maintenance plea to be heard. The man appealed against the order and the family court cancelled it, and the requirement of a hefty guarantee or a guarantor which had been made.
Husband Freed From Supporting Wife Who Refuses 'Get' Order
Question:
Does a man who pays his wife maintenance according to a family court ruling still have to support her if the rabbinical court passes judgment saying that she must divorce him, but she refuses to accept the "get"?
Answer:
No ! However, the husband will need to bring appropriate action at the family court to relieve him of the maintenance obligation. In response to action brought by the husband, in November 2005 Jerusalem Family Court held that a woman who refused to accept a get ordered by the rabbinical court would lose her right to maintenance. The husband would not be obliged to support her from the time it had recorded her refusal, and not from the time it ordered her to divorce, it held.
Parents of Different Religions – Effect on Child Maintenance
Question:
Does it make any difference what religion each parent is as far as their relative responsibilities for child maintenance is concerned – and does this mean that certain fathers will pay more because of their religion, or that of the mother ?
Answer:
Yes , it can do, and very much so ! Because of the unique family law system in Israel, which is a blend of religious and civil law inherited from the days of the Ottoman rule and the British Mandate, a non-custodial father's obligation may vary very much depending on his religion and that of the mother, and whether they were ever married or not !
Under Israeli law where a father who is the non-custodial parent has a personal or religious law (e.g. if he is Jewish, Moslem, and certain Christian sects), then his maintenance obligation towards his minor children will be governed by it. This could be a sole obligation e.g. under Jewish law a father bears sole responsibility to support children born to him of a Jewish mother, until they are 15. A Jewish From then until the age of 15, it is shared equally between both parents, until the age of 18.
If, however, under his personal law, a father is not obliged to support his minor child/ren (e.g. under Islamic law where he is not married to the mother), or if he has no personal law applying to him (e.g. if he belongs to a faith unrecognized in Israel e.g. Anglican Christian, or has no religion ), then he will be obliged to support his minor children according to civil law. Under this, the Family Law Amendment (Maintenance) Act of 1959, both parents are liable to support their minor children, according to their relative incomes.
One can get the absurd situation whereby a Jewish father of Jewish children may be solely liable under Jewish law for supporting his child's basic needs until the age of 15, with the mother only having to contribute between the ages of 15-18, whereas an Anglican Christian father , or a father with no religion, with a child born to a Jewish mother, will be jointly liable with her, to support their minor, according to their relative incomes, until the age of 18. The Jewish father could be paying double what the Christian father pays…even if they both have young children of similar age !
Discrimination Against Jewish Men – Child Maintenance
Question:
How equally does Jewish law treat men and women when it comes to their relative maintenance burden as parents of minor children ?
Answer:
Unequally, stressed Tel Aviv Family Court in a maintenance decision in January 2003 in which it contrasted substantive Jewish law’s unequal attitude towards the sexes with Israel’s international commitment to equality between the sexes under the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.
“Jewish law obliges the father to maintain his minor children (until the age of 15) and it is up to him alone to supply their essential needs, while it is only possible to oblige the mother to supply maintenance from the laws of charity , above essential maintenance”, it said.
Father's Earnings – Failure to Declare
Question:
What can happen in a child maintenance case if the father refuses to declare his income when he files his defence ?
Answer:
The court can declare his income according to the version the mother gave in her plea. This is what Tel Aviv Family Court did in July 2006 when the father failed to give details of his income or attach supporting documentation in his defence pleadings in a plea for child maintenance filed by the mother.
Wife’s Jewishness Unproved – Effect On Children’s Maintenance
Question:
What consequences would there be regarding my maintenance obligation towards my children if I proved to the rabbinical court that my wife , who filed for divorce there, was not Jewish ?
Answer:
If it is proved that a mother is not Jewish then according to Jewish law, her children are not Jewish. This would mean that the father’s maintenance obligation towards his minor children would be governed by civil law, and not Jewish law. According to the Family Amendment (Maintenance) Act of 1959 , parents share the maintenance obligation towards their minor children , according to their relative incomes.
Jewish Child’s Income Can Affect Child Support
Question:
My wife and I are very comfortably off and want for nothing. We have just one child, aged 12. My wife’s mother passed away a few years ago, leaving our daughter, her only grandchild, a substantial amount of real estate, including an apartment block and shops which are rented out. My wife and I do not get along and have decided to divorce. I agree that she should have custody over our daughter though I disagree with her about the level of child maintenance she has suggested, due to the monthly income received from rental of the real estate. Could I still have to pay child maintenance for my daughter even though her own income exceeds my monthly salary ? ! We are all Jewish.
Answer:
A Jewish father is obliged to support his minor child/ren born to a Jewish mother according to Jewish law. Until the child is aged six, a Jewish’s father’s maintenance obligation to his child is absolute – he still has to support him regardless of whether the child has his own income.
From the age of 6-15 the obligation is ‘semi-absolute’ . If the child has no independent income then the father’s maintenance obligation will still be absolute – the entire burden will fall on his shoulder’s alone. If, however, the child has his own independent source of income – e,g. through inheritance or a trust fund then this will be taken into account. If a child maintenance plea is filed and it is established that the child’s income is greater than his needs, then almost certainly the father will be exempt from supporting him, or will only have to pay very low child maintenance. If, however, the child’s needs are shown to be greater than his income, then the father will be obliged to pay the difference.
Child Maintenance - Jewish Toddler & Trust Fund
Question:
My wife and I have separated. Our 3 year old child lives with her. My wife says I am legally bound to support our son but I said it is ridiculous as has his own income from a trust fund his maternal grandfather made for him. My wife and I are Jewish. Do I have to pay child maintenance?
Answer:
A Jewish father’s maintenance obligation is based on Jewish religious law which has been adopted by civil legislation, the Family Law Amendment (Maintenance) Act of 1959. Up until a minor is 6 the father’s maintenance obligation is absolute in Jewish law, so your 3 year old's own income from a trust fund would not alter your maintenance obligation at this stage ,but between the ages of 6-15 it will be aken into account.
Father’s Maintenance Obligation & Yeshiva Studies
Question:
Does a Jewish father who studies at Yeshiva and does not work have to support his children ?
Answer:
Yes. Studying at Yeshiva does not free a father of his maintenance obligation to his minor children under Jewish law, and nor does an agreement made in which the father-in-law undertakes to support the family so that the son-in-law can devote himself to religious study . While Jewish learning is an important value it takes second place to a Jewish father’s duty to support his children, held Jerusalem family court in July 2001 .
In the case the mother had filed the father for maintenance for the couple’s three young children. In his defence the father , who came from a rabbinical family, claimed that an agreement signed by the couple’s fathers before their marriage freed him of any financial obligation towards their future children and allowed him to devote himself to religious study. In the agreement the father-in-law had undertaken to provide the couple with a monthly income. Following his death and after his daughter’s funds started to run dry, the father was filed for maintenance . The family court rejected his defence and held that the minors were not bound by the agreement. They were not parties to it and were not even born at the time it was made, it said. Any financial help he received from his wife or family was purely voluntary and did not relieve the father of his obligations, the court held, ordering him to pay child maintenance and stressing that he must make a great effort to support his minor children.
A grandparent’s Child Maintenance Obligation
Question:
My husband has disappeared abroad and I cannot trace him. I cannot support our children. My father-in-law is very wealthy. Is he obliged to support the children if their own father does not?
Answer:
Yes. A grandparent can be liable for his/her grandchild’s maintenance if the parents cannot support them. Under the Family Law Amendment (Maintenance) Act of 1959 a grandparent is under a legal duty to support his/her grandchildren in certain circumstances. They are that the parents themselves cannot do so and that the grandparent has a surplus from which to support the minors, after first providing for his/her spouse and any minor children they both have.
These points were emphasized by the Supreme Court in the late 1970’s when a minor’s paternal grandmother was held to be liable for her granddaughter’s maintenance after her son disappeared overseas and the mother could not support the child alone.
Mother Works – Plus Child Support From Paternal Grandparents
Question:
I am divorced, with custody of the children. My ‘ex’ does not pay the child maintenance the court sets. He is very unstable and seems incapable of holding down any job. His parents are very comfortably off. Can I get maintenance from them if I work ?
Answer:
The fact that the mother works does not, in itself, prevent the grandchildren from being entitled to maintenance from their paternal grandfather if their own father cannot support them.
In January 2003 the Kfar Saba Family Court ordered paternal grandparents to pay 2,300 shekels maintenance for their two grandchildren, according to the 1959 Family Law Amendment (Maintenance) Act. It was satisfied that their father, who suffered from severe emotional problems and Attention Deficiency HyperActivity Disorder (A.D.H.D.) had no means of supporting the children, whereas the paternal grandparents, in their sixties, both worked and were comfortably off. The father was always in and out of temporary work and had been jailed several times for the non-payment of child maintenance after the mother had brought proceedings against him at the bailiff’s office to enforce the child maintenance judgment. Supporting the child alone, as she had done so for a prolonged period, was taking too much of a toll on the mother, who worked as a teacher and also gave private lessons to supplement her income, the court said. Under the divorce agreement the father had been obliged to pay maintenance of 3,700 shekels, although the mother had sued the paternal grandparents for triple this amount.
Grandfathers Share Child Maintenance Liability Together
Question:
My daughter-in-law threatened to sue me for maintenance for my grandchild after my son fled the country to escape creditors. It seems unfair that one grandfather – and not both – should shoulder the burden. Can the court share the burden between us ?
Answer:
Yes. Under the Family Law Amendment (Maintenance) Act of 1959 a grandfather can be liable for the maintenance of his minor grandchild/ren if the parents cannot do so, providing that he has a surplus after providing for himself and his spouse and any of their minor children first. Furthermore, the Supreme Court has held that the court can oblige other relatives of the same rank separately, and together, and to share out the maintenance burden between them. Thus, depending on the circumstances, both grandparents may have to support a grandchild. In the particular case referred to, the Supreme Court ordered a grandfather to compensate the other grandfather who had been held liable for the maintenance of the grandchild.
Grandparents Add In-laws To Maintenance Plea
Question:
How can grandparents, who have been sued for child maintenance by their grandchildren after their son can’t manage to pay, get their in-laws to share the burden of supporting them ?
Answer:
Grandparents who are interested in getting their in-laws (the other grandparents) to share the maintenance burden for their grandchildren should make a formal request to the court for them to be added as respondents in the maintenance action, or for the plaintiff to supply material regarding their income.
Maintenance Liability of Adoptive Father’s Family
Question:
My husband and I separated. I filed him at the family court for maintenance for our child, whom we both adopted . I got a decision awarding temporary maintenance. My husband has now disappeared abroad and I cannot trace him. My in-laws are well-off. Can they be made to support our child instead of my husband – or is this not possible because he is adopted ?
Answer:
The family of an adoptive parent may have a legal obligation to support a minor if the adoptive parent himself does not do so. The Family Law Amendment (Maintenance) Act of 1959 covers situations where certain relatives of a person with a maintenance obligation are obliged to support a dependent instead of him. It treats adopted children like biological children and places the potential burden for supporting them on the shoulders of the relatives of the adoptive parent. Under the act an adoptive grandparent may have a legal duty to support his/her adoptive grandchildren in certain circumstances.These are that the adoptive parents themselves cannot do so and that the grandparent has a surplus from which to support the minors, after first providing for his/her spouse and any minor children they both have.
Husband’s Maintenance - When Wife Must Pay
Question:
Can a wife be made to support her husband ?
Answer:
No, as a rule but yes, but only in certain circumstances. Under Jewish law a wife may have to support her husband according to the ‘laws of charity’ if a)if she has independent financial means above what she requires to support herself b) if her husband lacks the ability or opportunity to support himself and c)his financial situation is very bad and he needs support.
A wife will only have to support her husband if all these conditions deriving from the ‘laws of charity’ are met and it is quite clear that she is only obliged to do so after she has provided for her own needs first.
If a Jewish husband does sue his wife for maintenance he should file the plea at the family court, not the rabbinical one. This is because the issue in question is not a ‘matter of marriage’ which lies within the latter`s exclusive jurisdiction. The obligation derives from the ‘ laws of charity ’ relating to any person in Israel and not from the woman’s status as a wife.
tel: 03-5234133, 077-3500000
fax: 03-5232251