Business
news
The husband proved that he was not a "shepherd of prostitutes" and received a significant discount from the amount of the ketubah
The claim of a woman whose husband had contact with foreign women that he was a "prostitute shepherd" was accepted in the rabbinical court and he was charged the full amount of the ketuba.
Why did the Great Rabbinical Court reverse the decision?
Tags
divorce
Walla!
Business
Thursday, 24 September 2020, 10:55
Share on Facebook
Share on WhatsApp
Share on general
Share on general
Share on Twitter
Share on Email
0 comments
Police have deployed dozens of checkpoints: heavy traffic loads ...
State Comptroller: Various and unemployed data do not receive a grant ...
Video of the Australian recycling industry angle
Orit Yehezkel - Manpower - Placement Companies
The restaurateurs break plates in protest against the closure: "We are broken" ...
Demonstration of black flags against Netanyahu in front of Ben Gurion Airport ...
Hospital congestion due to rising morbidity in Corona ...
Closing of the holidays: Schools and kindergartens are closed, learning ...
Israel signs peace agreement between the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain: ...
On the historic flight to Abu Dhabi: Passing over my name ...
Actress and Israel Prize winner Lia Koenig Stolper at the ceremony ...
AP, Reuters, Getty Images, Shutterstock
The Great Rabbinical Court reversed the ruling of the Jerusalem Regional Rabbinical Court, and required a husband who was accused by his ex-wife of being a "shepherd of prostitutes" in only a third of the Ketubah.
This emerges following an appeal filed by the husband through attorneys Yossi Akiva and Yael Cohen to the Great Rabbinical Court in Jerusalem.
The original ruling was NIS 555,000, and instead the husband will be required to pay only NIS 180,000.
These are couples from the center of the country who married more than 10 years ago and have four children.
A few years ago they sought a divorce and the wife claimed that her husband was having relationships with foreign women.
This, after she managed to get her hands on correspondence between her husband and foreign women, in which messages of a sexual nature were conveyed.
The district court ruled that the husband admitted to these correspondences and even refused to be examined by a polygraph, which undermines the credibility of his version and therefore there is no doubt that he did associate with foreign women.
Therefore, the Regional Rabbinical Court ruled that these correspondences are sufficient to define the husband as a "prostitute shepherd" according to Halacha and to charge him with a divorce and the full amount of the ketubah.
More on Walla!
NEWS
Advertising by location: Small businesses will benefit from tailor-made advertising
In collaboration with Bank Hapoalim
To the full article
Immoral, but not pimping either
Adv. Yossi Akiva (Photo: Sigal Colton)
Adv. Yael Cohen
In the absence of the husband,
attorneys Yossi Akiva and Yael Cohen,
who deal with family law, argued in the appeal that the district court did not address false complaints filed by the woman against the police and the testimony of a woman who initiated allegations that the husband had intimate relationships with foreign women.
In addition, the lawyers argued that it was also difficult to determine absolutely from his wife's interrogation that the husband was "herding prostitutes."
According to them, correspondence with sexual messages between the husband and foreign women is an act of ugliness and it is forbidden behavior and serious frivolity, but at the same time the findings of the case do not necessarily indicate that the husband does have intimate relationships with foreign women.
In his absence, they argued that his refusal to be examined by a polygraph and leaving many question marks necessitated a written compromise, adding that a woman should not be completely denied that the woman also had a part in the dissolution of the marriage.
According to them, the wife objected to testifying in the court of the mediator between the parties and prevented the presentation of videos invented by the husband, through which he sought to prove her conduct towards him and her being a factor in ending the marriage.
The woman's conduct, they say, proves that she has something to hide from the court and therefore the court refrained from extracting all the facts in the case, and that the husband's refusal to be examined by a polygraph does not necessarily reflect a failure to tell the truth by him.
The judges accepted most of the claims in the husband's absence and ruled that the husband would be required to pay NIS 180,000 out of the full amount of NIS 555,000, and in addition the wife would have to pay the husband NIS 10,000 for the cost of filing the appeal.
Share on Facebook
Share on WhatsApp
Share on general
Share on general
Share on Twitter
Share on Email
0 comments