This section deals with a variety of issues not covered by the other sub-topics.These range from items on whether family pets, lottery winnings, stamp collections , tax credits etc are marital property, through items on who has a right to live in the family home, problems of registering joint ownership etc.
Putting Principles of Property Split into Practice
Question:
Even when the court decides what each party is entitled to in principle, when there is a division of family property, following a divorce in a long standing marriage, how is this actually calculated in practice, where it becomes complicated , with lots of financial interests involved , and only guidelines provided for in the judgment ?
Answer:
The services of a suitable professional, such as an accountant or even more so an actuary, where calculations are needed, and rights realized /cashed in early etc, are needed . The parties can apply to court for an appointment of such a professional.
Couple’s Pet Dog – Marital Property & ‘ Mutual Custody’
Question:
My wife and I own a beautiful, pedigree dog that we raised from a puppy after we got married. My wife and I are in the process of divorcing. We have no children. We can manage to reach agreement on just about everything – our apartment, its contents, savings – apart from our beloved pet, to whom we are both extremely attached. Neither of us is willing to consider giving up the dog. What is likely to happen ?
Answer:
A family pet acquired during the marriage is ‘joint property’ and the court can decide on its fate when it deals with a plea to divide the couple’s property when the parties cannot reach an agreement amongst themselves. In principle the court can order the sale of joint property and the distribution of the proceeds of its sale between the parties. While it would be within its powers to do so regarding a dog over which the parties were ‘fighting’ it could equally opt for a more humane – or canine – option by ordering both parties to have ‘mutual custody’ over the pet so that it could spend its time between both owners.
Lottery Winnings: Marital Property or not ?
Question:
I married a few years ago but feel like splitting up. I do the lottery every week and have been near the jackpot several times. I buy the lottery ticket from my salary and my wife is never involved. If I leave her and win would the winnings be mine or would I have to share it with her ?
Answer:
In general if a couple are married and live together then any lottery winnings will be joint property to be balanced out between them upon divorce, according to the principles of the 1973 Spouses’ Property Relations Act. It does not matter which of them buys the ticket and with whose money, unless it is clearly agreed otherwise from the outset. If, however, the man clearly separates from his wife, buys a ticket and wins the lottery then the winnings will be his only and not joint property, even if he is still not divorced.
‘Toto-Teko’ Win – Father Brings Legal Action Against Son
Question:
Who is entitled to the winnings on a gambling ticket if it is bought by a father with his own money, filled in and sent by him, based on his minor son’s guesses, and it bears the son’s name on the back " for luck " ?
Answer:
Most probably the son. In a case before the Haifa Family Court in October 2002 it was held that the winnings of a ‘Toto-Teko’ ticket based on his minor son’s guesses regarding the number of draws in football league matches belonged to the son, even though the father actually filled in the form , paid for the ticket and sent it .The father had failed to persuade the court that he was a party to the contract with the gambling organisers and that was not just acting as an agent for his son. It rejected his claim that he had rights in the win because he had written his son’s name on the back of the ticket "for luck".
The win had been made when the son was a minor and the winnings – a cheque in the son’s name – had been deposited in the son’s name at a bank, with the father having an unlimited power of attorney. The father had accessed funds freely when the son was a minor but after he had reached maturity, the son had cancelled the father’s power of attorney. The court ruled that evidence brought by the son showed that he was a party to the contract with the organisers and was entitled to cancel the power of attorney as he was the full owner of the winnings, and the father had no rights in the property at all.
Stamp Collection: Joint Property or not ?
Case:
I married in 1980. I have a valuable stamp collection, some of which I inherited and the rest my own. I have a profitable hobby - stamp dealing. If I divorce will my wife be entitled to part of my collection ?
Answer:
If a couple who marry from 1974 onwards divorce their financial situation is governed by the principles of the 1973 Spouses’ Property Relations Act , unless they have made an agreement otherwise. Basically , property acquired during the course of the marriage is joint, to be balanced between both spouses, unless agreed otherwise or the property falls into one of the exceptions. Property received through inheritance is one of the exceptions. Hence, the part of the stamp collection inherited would be entirely the husband’s upon divorce but the wife would, in principle, be entitled to a half- share in the rest (or its equivalent value) and a half- share in the profits from stamp dealing. It does not matter that stamp collecting is the husband’s own, private hobby and his wife took not interest in it. Clearly there is a problem regarding proof of which stamps were inherited, received by way of gift or purchased, due to the dynamic nature of the hobby, unless the collection was carefully catalogued and all sales were carefully recorded.
Home Renovation Cost: Marital Property ?
Question:
My wife and I married a few years ago but already want to divorce. After the wedding I moved into the flat she was living in and had inherited from a relative. It had not been decorated for years. I paid for most of the renovations – new wiring, plumbing and flooring, but repainted the flat myself. Have I any rights in the flat and/or the investment/renovations in it ?
Answer:
Property settlements of couples marrying from 1974 onwards are governed by the Spouses’ Property Relations Act of 1973. Property inherited before or during the marriage is not included in the pool of marital property to be balanced between the spouses on divorce.
Renovations to inherited property can, however, be regarded as joint property if the source of financing is proved by the spouse claiming reimbursement of some of the cost. Where one spouse carried out some of the renovations him/herself he/she may be able to claim back the equivalent estimated cost of the work. The burden of proof will lie on the side claiming re-imbursement.
In April 2001 the Tel Aviv District Court dealt with an ex-husband’s appeal against a family court judgment ordering him to pay his ex-wife half the cost of extensive renovations carried out on the family home which he had inherited before their marriage. The court accepted the ex-husband’s appeal and rejected the wife’s counter-appeal.
It held that the wife had failed to prove marital partnership in the renovations. She had claimed different facts regarding her financial contribution to the cost of renovations – which is not permissible. Firstly she claimed that she had taken out a loan and later claimed that her mother-in-law had paid for the renovations as a joint gift to the couple - but she failed to bring evidence to support either claim. The court noted that other judgments regarding legal actions for property between the couple had referred to the wife’s lack of credibility and consistent inability to substantiate her claims.
Professional Sport – Player’s Card and Marital Property
Question:
My husband are in the process of divorcing and the battle over property is at its height. He is a professional footballer, in the twilight of his career. Am I entitled to half of the value of his player’s card ?
Answer:
No ! Usually a player’s card belongs to the sporting association he belongs to, and is not his property. Anyway, where a professional player is nearing the end of his career his card is not so valuable.
‘Green Number’ on Taxi and Marital Property
Question:
My wife and I are in the process of divorcing. We are negotiating a settlement and have reached an agreement about everything except for the ‘green number’ for operating my taxi. My wife claims that it is joint property . I disagree, saying it is a personal right that I got as part of my rehabilitation as a disabled person. Does a ‘green number’ on a taxi constitute marital property ?
Answer:
Yes ! In 2001 the Tel Aviv Family Court addressed this question where a wife asked to divide the use of the ‘green number’ used to operate her husband’s taxi. She made her plea under the Moveable Property Law of 1971. In this case the husband was disabled and an arrangement had been made with the National Insurance Institute whereby he would capitalise part of his future rights as a disabled person to finance the purchase of a green number for him to operate a taxi. He claimed in his defence that his right to use the taxi constituted a benefit or compensation for physical damage. If his claim had been accepted it would have meant that it constituted an exception and would have not been joint property. However, the court rejected this claim and held that the right to operate a taxi given to a disabled person for his rehabilitation is a form of rehabilitation and not compensation. The court accepted the wife’s claim that the ‘green number’ was joint property to be divided between the couple
Loan During Marriage - Liability of ‘ex’ As Marital Debt
Question:
My father has sued my ‘ex’ husband for a loan he gave him during our marriage which he did not pay back. My ‘ex’ says that I am liable for half of that debt ! Is he right ?
Answer:
As a general rule spouses are mutually liable for debts taken out by each other during the course of their marital life together. There are exceptions. The Supreme Court has held that a spouse is not liable for a debt run up by the other spouse which is of an ‘exceptionally personal nature’.
Applying the above principle, one can say that where a loan taken out during the marriage was for a mutual purpose e.g. to allow home improvements or to help the couple out through a difficult financial period then both spouses will be equally liable for it even after the divorce. Accordingly, if this were the case, and the father succeeds in getting a judgment ordering his ex son-in-law to repay him the debt, then the latter is entitled to reclaim half of what he pays back from his ex-wife. However, if the ex son-in-law borrowed the money for a purpose which would fall into the category of exceptions then the ex-wife would not bear joint responsibility for paying it.
Dividing Up ‘Minus’ In Marital Bank Account
Question:
How can a married couple who wish to divorce end their financial partnership as a couple if they have a large ‘minus’ in their joint bank account, with no hope of covering it ?
Answer:
Where the joint, bank account which is marital property is in deficit (‘minus’) it can be divided upon divorce in two ways. The first way is to get the bank’s co-operation in splitting the bank account into two separate bank accounts, with each party being solely responsible for the debt in the account he or she holds, in relation to the bank. However, most banks will not agree to this, and prefer to have mutual liability of each party for the one, joint account, so that each party is liable both separately and individually for the debts in the account.
Trust Fund For Grandchildren
Question:
My grandchildren are very young now but I would like to give them a substantial start in life when they grow up but am worried that they could squander the money. What do you recommend ?
Answer:
Setting up a trust fund in favour of grandchildren,to start either now, or after one’s demise is probably the best way of giving them a headstart in life and protecting them from a tendency to over/mis-spend their inheritance. A trust fund is a legal instrument which nominates a trustee who holds the money/shares etc in trust for the beneficiary/beneficiaries. He/she is responsible for managing , investing and releasing the money. One can have the fund drafted, for example, so that grandchildren have controlled access to the interest on the investment via the trustee during their teenage years and/or early adulthood, with it being released for specified purposes
(eg education/travel), with the investment itself only being fully handed over to them when they reach a certain age ( say, 21,25, or 30) or marry etc.
Purchasing Property With Unregistered Title
Question:
I would like to buy a particular property but am worried because the man selling it is not registered as the owner at the Lands Registry. He has shown me an original contract he made to purchase the property with the heirs who inherited it from their mother. The property is still registered in the late mother’s name. The “owner” says these relatives are at each other’s throats and never obtained a probate order after their mother’s death. Because of this, the “owner” says, he could not get transfer title to the property into his name at the Lands Registry. I want to buy the property but am worried about buying something that I might not be able to register in my name. Is there a legal solution ?
Answer:
There is a solution but it will take time and money. If the property is purchased from the present “owner”( a contract signed and money paid) what will actually be bought are contractual or obligatory rights, and not property rights, as title was never transferred to the present owner. Courts now recognize such rights as binding but to proceed a judgment will have to be obtained from the district court where the property is located declaring the new purchaser as the owner. After this is obtained, the new owner can register himself as such, providing any relevant taxes are paid up. To gain this judgment an inheritance order is needed saying that the relatives inherited certain rights to the property and were able to sell/pass on those rights. The best option is to seek the co-operation of these relatives, ideally getting them to sign a paper saying they have no objection to the new purchaser being registered as the owner.
Battle Over House Contents
Question:
What happens if a couple who split up want to divide up the house contents but cannot agree on who gets what ?
Answer:
The principles relating to the allocation of house contents between a couple ending their relationship are governed by the Immoveable Property Law of 1971. This states that each partner is entitled to request the division of joint property. If there is an agreement between them limiting this right then the court can order the division of the property despite this, if it regards this as right in the particular circumstances.
It adds that the property should be divided according to agreement between the partners but failing that according to a court order . The court can a) just decide who should get each item or b) can order their sale and divide the proceeds or c) divide it in another way which it regards fair and efficient in the circumstances.
The family court thus has a wide range of options should the couple fail to reach an agreement about their house contents.
Child Over 21 – No Right To Live At Parents’ Home
Question:
I have just finished the army, and celebrated my 21st birthday . I want to live with my parents, but one of them objects. Am I legally entitled to live with them ?
Answer:
No ! A child over the age of 21 does not have a legally protected right to live in his parents’ home. Accordingly if his parents, or one of them, object to him doing so, for whatever reason, then he has no legal cause against them. Furthermore, if he is asked to leave the house, or if legal action is taken to make him leave if he refuses, he will have no defence
Eviction & Jointly-Owned Property
Question:
My wife and I have long-standing marital problems but still live together in our home, which is in our joint names. My wife’s daughter from her first marriage lives with us although she is in her twenties. The apartment is small and she uses a room I would use for my hobby, photography. Do I have the legal right to force her to leave ?
Answer:
The Supreme Court has held that the joint owner of a property has no right to give another person, who has no property rights in the apartment, permission to live there where this would infringe upon the other owner’s occupation and use of the property. This is so whether the person in question is a stranger or an adult child. Where there is no legal obligation on a parent to supply an adult child with accommodation, there is no reason to depart from this precedent.
This was clarified in a case before the Tel Aviv Family Court where an apartment was jointly owned by a couple locked in a long-standing legal battle. The husband applied for a temporary order forbidding their adult children from entering/sleeping there. The court held that one joint owner can invite guests providing it does not interfere with the other’s reasonable use of the property, even without the other’s permission. Jewish law, it said, recognised the right of a parent to host grown up children, and incorporates this in a woman’s maintenance. Rejecting the husband’s plea the court held that the adult son could visit his mother at the apartment during reasonable hours but could not stay overnight.
Moslem Ex-Wife and Children – Eviction Order
Question:
Has a Moslem woman who divorces any legal defence/claims against a plea to evict her and her minor children from her ex- father-in-law’s property ?
Answer:
Yes, according to a judgment from Kfar Saba Family Court in March 2003, which was based on Supreme Court precedent in the Abu Romani case.
The Kfar Saba Family Court held that , on the particular facts, the former father-in-law could not cancel the right he had given his son and former daughter-in-law to live in part of his property, the building of which they had completed and financed, according to Moslem custom. He had not limited his permission time-wise, and would not have issued them with a demand to vacate the property had they remained married, the court held. Furthermore, he provided no evidence to support the alleged grounds for the eviction plea – heavy debts which he claimed to be facing. Accordingly, he was acting in bad faith.
“The plaintiff has made and continues to make cynical use of court proceedings which do not sit with the principle of good faith which has been set by the Supreme Court on not just one occasion in a wide range of the law’s branches… It is possible to say that the plaintiff has blocked his heart to the needs of his grandchildren,even when his son (their father) divorced from his wife (the plaintiff’s daughter-in-law)”, the family court ruled.
The plaintiff, the father-in-law had provided the plot, in which the couple and the ex-husband’s brother would live, in separate apartments. The wife had worked and both she and her father , and her ex-husband had contributed to the completion of the building ready for habitation by them after their marriage, as was customary among Moslems.
The family court ruled that although the apartment had not been registered in either the ex-husband or ex-wife’s name, she and her minor children still deserved protection against eviction provided by civil law, the Land Law of 1969 , before their permission to live in the apartment could be cancelled - and compensation of a quarter of its value.
Leaves Home and Gets Fee For Use Until Property Vacant
Question:
I am a widower. I bought an apartment with my son and daughter-in-law as we put our rights to special grants for immigrants purchasing a home together. The trouble is that my son has moved out, and gone to live with his girlfriend. It is impossible for me to stay on in the apartment with my daughter-in-law. If I leave, can I claim money from her for use of my room until our partnership in the property is divided up ? I am sure she will ‘rent’ it out to someone unofficially and make money on it anyway.
Answer:
Yes, in principle a person who has a share in a property and leaves it is entitled to claim money for the use of his/her part . In a case before the Tel Aviv Family Court in September 2002 where it divided up partnership in an apartment bought by the deceased, her mother-in-law and her husband as immigrants with state help , it was held that the mother-in-law was entitled to claim back money for use of her room in the apartment after she had left it, until it was vacated for sale.
Fee For Using Property – Calculation and Levying
Case:
Ten years ago I bought an apartment together with my son and we lived there together with him until just over a year ago when he basically forced me to leave. I now live in an old age home and in need of money to enable me to carry on living there. I know that my room stood empty for a few months after I left the apartment but that my son then rented it out for quite a handsome sum. Am I entitled to part of the rent my son receives ?
Answer:
Where a person is forced to leave his home his right to a fee for its use comes into being from the time of his departure, even if the person forcing him to depart leaves it empty . The actual calculation and levying of the fee is often difficult , and depends on a number of factors. Firstly, whether the apartment is rented or not, the court will be required to determine the appropriate fee . Secondly, the proportion of this fee the person forced to leave the apartment is entitled to must also be determined. This depends on where the particular apartment was registered.
If the property is registered at the Lands Registry, then unless the share of the partners is specified, the assumption in the 1969 Land Act that each partner has an equal share will apply. If the apartment is registered with a building company, the court has more flexibility as the 1971 Moveable Property Act will apply. This allows the court to divide up the property in what it considers as the most fair and efficient manner, given the particular circumstances . In a case before the Tel Aviv Family Court in September 2002 it was held that each partner should be entitled to a share in the property in proportion to the part he paid towards it.
Thus a person buying a property with another and who is forced to leave it should be entitled to a fee for its use from the time he departs , although the amount he should receive will depend on where the property was registered.
Hopeless Plea For Rent From Wife Before Marriage
Question:
What chance does a husband have of getting rent or payment for use of his apartment before they were married, as part of property proceedings between them ?
Answer:
Very very slim – and such a request is likely to be viewed very negatively by the court, and likely to be rejected for lack of any legal basis, and being very petty,unless there is any written evidence of the wife's undertaking to pay for accommodation before their marriage.
Property Deals –'Consent' Remark on Land Register
Question:
My mother is an elderly widow. She has told my brother and I many times over the years that we will both inherit her apartment when she dies. Recently, I am concerned because she is becoming weak, both physically and mentally and I am worried that she may transfer the property to my brother who is rather pushy over my head. Is there any way of preventing this ?
Answer:
Yes, a mechanism exists under the Land Law of 1969 for a ‘consent remark’ to be made at the land registry to prevent the transfer of a property or rights in it where the registrar is satisfied that a transaction has been conditioned/limited. Such a condition/limitation can arise from legislation, a court order or from an undertaking by the owner of the property/rights . The registrar can enter a remark to this effect on the register with the third party’s/parties’ agreement. This should prevent a transaction being effected over someone’s head as the need for mutual consent is registered.
Property Dispute Between Sisters over Division of Ownership
Question :
Are conditions in a will about restricting or conditioning future division of partnership in the testator’s property to be viewed as ‘a partnership agreement’ which can expire in time, according to the 1969 Land Law ?
Answer:
No, instructions in a testator’s will, it was held in June 2003 by Tel Aviv Family Court, do not amount to a “ partnership agreement” according to the 1969 Land Law. It rejected a plea by the plaintiff to divide partnership in a property owned jointly with her sister. The plaintiff claimed that she had a right to divide the property because instructions in their late mother’s will conditioning the end of the sister’s partnership in the property were subject to the Land Law , and after 3 years a court could rule on division of the partnership despite them. But the court rejected this argument and held that the conditions set in the will about ending partnership did not amount to a ‘partnership agreement’ , but were binding and clear wishes of the testator which should be followed.
Division of Partners’ Share in Property at Land Registry
Question:
A few years ago my husband and I decided to buy an apartment together with his father by combining our rights. We did so by my husband and I taking a few loans and his father a smaller loan. The apartment was registered in our names at the Land Registry, without any mention of our respective shares. I am considering divorce now and want to know what my share in the apartment is.
Answer:
Where a property is registered at the Lands Registry in a number of names without the share of each being specified, then there is an assumption under the 1969 Land Law that the shares of the partners are equal. However, the act also states that when such a property is divided it will be done so either by the partners’ agreement or by a court order. Accordingly, if the partners can agree on the size of their respective shares then this will determine the outcome but if they cannot then the only option is for the submission of a plea to divide the partnership so that the court will decide
on the matter.
Link Between Share in Property and Place of Registration
Question:
During my marriage my wife and I purchased two properties together with my wife’s parents. In both cases my wife and I paid for three quarters of the loans taken out to finance the purchase, and her parents helped us by taking an additional mortgage. One property was registered at the Land Registry and the other with a building company. Recently my wife’s parents have become very ill and I fear their days are numbered. What would my share be in each of the properties ?
Answer:
The answer to the question depends on where the properties were registered. When a property is jointly registered at the Land Registry without any mention of the share of each of the owners, then there is a legal assumption under the 1969 Land Law that each party owns an equal share. However, it is possible to ensure an unequal partnership regarding property rights, by agreement between the parties, who can do this at any time, including when they divide their partnership in the property.
However, where a property is registered with a building company, the situation is different, the Tel Aviv Family Court held in September 2002. The Land Law cannot be applied in such a situation, it held, as it is impossible to speak of ‘property rights’. What is relevant here is the 1971 Moveable Property Law, it held. This legislation, in contrast to the Land Law, allows the court to divide up partnership in the property in the most fair and efficient way, given the circumstances. The judgment held that each owners share in the apartment should be in proportion to the part he paid towards its purchase .
Splitting Land in Shared Ownership
Question:
If two relatives are given a plot of land as a gift together, and jointly registered as owners, what can one of them do to solve the issue once and for all if the other "takes over" the show, and occupies/uses more than his fair share of the land ?
Answer :
One option is for the dissatisfied owner of the plot of land to take action to
formalize a division of ownership, and the re-registration of it so that each of them is the complete owner of a separate part.
In March 2006 Hadera Family court ordered the division of ownership of a plot of land owned jointly by two brothers who had received it as a gift. One brother claimed the other had infiltrated his land and taken it over, and asked the court to divide joint ownership in it. The other brother, in his defence, claimed he had not acted wrongly, but according to a gentlemanly agreement effected by a relative many years ago, that divided the plot into two, slightly unequal parts, and that he had won the draw to the bigger part . This was proved to the satisfaction of the court, which ordered the physical division of the plot along these principles, and the subsequent registration of each new plot under its new owner.
The same principle applies to wills - it is also possible to change or cancel a will in favour of different beneficiaries.
Car Bought in Daughter’s Name – Not Marital Property
Question:
Our minor daughter is 100% disabled and permanently in a wheelchair. My husband and I wanted to buy a car so that we could take her out and applied for a tax exemption available for the disabled. As the process was extremely slow we decided to buy the car without the exemption and register it in our daughter’s name. We did so – even though we had meantime separated because of marital problems. I have custody over our daughter. My husband and I are locked in a divorce dispute . He demands half of the value of the car. Is he legally justified in doing so ?
Answer:
Not necessarily. In an ordinary situation where a husband and wife buy something and register it in one or both of their names this property is joint. Where, however, they decide to buy something ( e.g. an apartment or car ) together and register it in the name of their child they have effectively given the minor a gift, regardless of whether the child is disabled or not. Once a gift requiring registration (such as an apartment or car) is registered in the recipient’s name by the couple then the transfer of the gift is complete – and the item is no longer part of their marital property. Neither of them can then demand or claim part of it.
If, however, one or both of the parents wants to restore their rights in the property which were transferred to the child then a plea must be made to the court and the General Guardian will be the respondent. If only one parent makes the plea and the other objects he/she is the respondent in the case. Court authorisation is required for any deeds relating to the property rights of a minor. In the circumstances described above, where the car was registered in the name of a minor child because she was disabled and it was intended to enable her to be mobile, it is almost certain that the husband’s plea will be rejected.
Right of Both Spouses To Use Family Car
Case:
My husband and have been locked in legal proceedings over property at the family court after I initiated our break-up. Out of spite he won’t let me use our car when he gets home from work. We live in a rural area and I have always used the car in the afternoons to take the children everywhere - to the doctor’s, friends, clubs etc . We bought the car a few years ago but it is registered in his name only. Can I take legal action against my husband about the use of the car ?
Answer:
Yes ! Even though the car is registered in the husband’s name if it was purchased during the marriage it is joint property. Furthermore, if asked, it is most likely that the family court will grant a temporary decision sharing the use of the car between both spouses as the vehicle was used by the wife beforehand as part of her and the children’s way of life. It can do so before it gives a final decision regarding the couple’s marital property.
In March 2002 the Kfar Saba family court gave a temporary decision dividing the use of the family car . In reaction to the wife filing for division of the couple’s property the husband had changed the code on the car’s alarm so the wife could not use the vehicle. Before that she used it to get to and from work , to transport the couple’s three children and do shopping. The court held that it had jurisdiction to give a temporary decision before it ruled on ownership of the car.
Editor’s Note – A wife’s right to the use of a family car has two legal origins – from her property rights and her right to maintenance from her husband.
Controversial Behaviour of Son Re Elderly Parent’s Property
Question:
I am an only child. My mother is an elderly widow. She has been living with me and my wife for several years because she could no longer live alone or manage her affairs due to a severe deterioration in her mental health. We are short of space now as our children are now growing up and need their own rooms. If both my mother and I sell our apartments we can buy a villa together with a parent’s unit. How can this be done ?
Answer:
Where an elderly parent has reached the stage where he/she can no longer manage his/her affairs it is possible for an adult child to ask to appoint him/her as the parent’s legal guardian. He/she can only act the parent’s good and has no powers to act for his own benefit, even if his future rights from inheritance are involved. If the appointment is made then the guardian will have to apply to the court for instructions/permission to sell the parent’s property and buy part of other property.
Where the court authorizes a sale of real estate within the framework of a guardianship case, it makes sure that the rights of the person lacking legal capacity are guaranteed , particularly regarding the registration of the equivalent value of that person’s rights in any real estate purchased jointly.
Action To Protect Spouse’s Property Rights Abroad
Question:
My husband has business interests overseas and is currently abroad. Our marriage has lasted for over 30 years but has been under strain recently and I have noticed that he is making heavy withdrawals from our savings accounts abroad . What can I do to protect my property rights if the accounts are abroad ?
Answer:
A wife in this situation who married before 1974 can apply for a division of marital property and within the framework of the plea apply for a special order called a Mareva Injunction to prevent her husband from making any dispositions relating to his wife’s share of their marital property. Under principles of marital partnership which apply to couples marrying before 1974, a wife is entitled to half of the couple’s property acquired during the marriage. This special order is ‘ in personam’ i.e. it is aimed at the individual even if he is abroad and would be designed to stop him performing any deeds with the wife’s share of money and rights until a court rules on the plea .
In August 2002 the Tel Aviv Family Court granted a Mareva Injunction against a husband preventing him from making dispositions regarding half of the sums in the couple’s accounts located in banks in Switzerland and Poland. The wife had applied for the order as part of her plea concerning the division of the couple’s property. The husband, who had business interests in a company in Poland, had started to use up the couple’s savings acquired during the course of their marriage and had started a relationship with a woman abroad.
Protected Tenancy – Relinquishment of Right Must Be Express
Question:
My brother and I are fighting over which of us should get our late father’s right as a protected tenant in his grocery shop. He has not filed any defence to my plea for a declaratory judgment at the family court that would name me as holding the right. Does that mean the court will regard him as giving up the fight and any claim to my late father’s right as a protected tenant ?
Answer:
A plea for a declaratory judgment naming one brother rather than the other as gaining their late father’s right as a protected tenant will be rejected even if no defence pleadings are made if there is no legal basis to the claim. The side asking for the declaratory judgment must prove a legal basis justifying his claim. If that side alleges that the other side has given up his claim to the protected tenancy the court will only recognize that the claim has been given up by the other party if he does so in an express and very clear manner, and it is not merely implied.
Inheriting Rights To Protected Tenancy and Abandonment Plea
Question:
My sister and I are competing over which of us should get my late mother’s right to a protected tenancy of a shop. If one of us ‘leaves’ it will this help the other’s case ?
Answer:
Abandonment is a ground for losing a right to a protected tenancy when the proceedings are between the owner and the tenant, the Tel Aviv family court stressed in 2001. However, it does not apply regarding proceedings between tenants themselves. The Family Court has jurisdiction under the 1972 Protected Tenancy Act to rule on which family member should hold on to the protected tenancy when the principal protected tenant dies , based on actual occupancy at the time of death.
Farming Family Claim Israel Lands Authority Acted Too Late
Question:
Can a family who have been farming land for generations successfully defend action to remove them from it for being too slow to act ?
Answer:
Yes, in principle, if they manage to prove that they have a legitimate defence relating to the ‘expiry’ of the plaintiff’s right to remove them, depending on the particular facts and circumstances. In October 2002 a family of ‘squatters’ who had been farming land for two generations continuously since the 1930’s successfully defended an action by the Israel Lands Authority to remove them from state land on this ground. The Tel Aviv Magistrate’s Court accepted the evidence the defendant provided about his late father beginning to work the land in the 1930’s and held that the period available for bringing an action regarding registered land such as this mentioned had elapsed. This was because although the 1969 Land Act abolished a time limit for bringing legal actions for registered land it did allow defences against actions which had ‘matured’ before it came into force. In this case as the permitted 25-year period for bringing action had expired before the Land Law of 1969 came into force the defendant was entitled to plead that the plaintiff’s right to initiate legal action against him had ‘expired.
Financial Implications For Husband of ‘Shlom Bayit’ Plea
Question:
I have been considering divorce and when I shared my thoughts with my wife she immediately filed for ‘Shlom Bayit’ at the rabbinical court. What are the financial implications of this ?
Answer:
Where the couple are Jewish and one of the parties has filed for ‘Shlom Bayit’ (marital reconciliation) at the rabbinical court this has negative implications for the husband financially. The ‘Shlom Bayit’ plea is designed to defer the date for the division of the couple’s property and the separation of their finances, so that it in effect enlarges the period for the wife’s claim to property.
Property Disputes - Mutual Consent For Druze Court Jurisdiction
Question:
Which court has jurisdiction over property disputes between a man and a wife, the Druze court or the family one ?
Answer:
If both parties agree the Druze Court can have jurisdiction but if this is not the case the family court will have jurisdiction. The concept of ‘binding’ property to the divorce plea at the Druze court, and the jurisdictional race to prevent the wife from filing for this separately at the family court , which exists with Jews , does not apply to Druze.
Man With Two Wives – Property Rights
Question:
My boyfriend is a married man whose wife ran off abroad with her lover many years ago. She has remained overseas, refuses to divorce and now lives underground. My boyfriend is in the process of getting permission from the Rabbinical court to marry a second wife, and has proposed marriage to me. I am concerned that if I accept, I won't have the same financial status and rights as a normal wife, because of his first wife. Are my fears founded ?
Answer:
If the Rabbinical Court grants your boyfriend permission to take another wife, and you do indeed get married, then you need not worry about his first wife's financial rights during your husband's lifetime. From the moment she ran off their financial partnership ended, and she has no rights in property accrued by him from that point on. She only has property rights arising from the marriage up until the point she fled. Thus once you marry, his first wife will have no rights in anything that is accrued during your marriage. She will, however, like you , as his wife, have rights in his estate by virtue of her status , if he dies without making a will specifically excluding her. If he dies intestate, any rights due to his wife will be split between the two of you.
tel: 03-5234133, 077-3500000
fax: 03-5232251