• Sentence

• family law

Precedent: A husband is entitled to alimony from his wife

The Haifa District Court approved a temporary decision of a family court according to which a woman who agreed with her husband on a full property share in the financial agreement made by the two will pay him thousands of shekels each month.

The reason: the income gaps between the parties and the husband's medical condition

Tags

• Divorce

• Foods

Adv. Rina Political, in collaboration with Zap Legal

Monday, 19 July, 2021, 10:23 Updated: 10:33

• Share on Facebook

• Share on WhatsApp

• Share on general

• Share on general

• Share on Twitter

• Share on Email

Divorce (Photo: ShutterStock)

The Haifa District Court recently upheld a precedent-setting decision by the Family Court that a woman would be required to pay her husband temporary alimony payments of NIS 4,000 per month.

In this decision, the court rejected the request for leave to appeal filed by the woman against an alimony charge, and ruled that this charge stemmed from the financial agreement made by the two.

The court also denied the woman's request to offset the amount of alimony determined from loans she repays each month.

More on Walla!

Findings of the private investigation - admissible evidence in any legal proceeding

To the full article

The wife claimed the husband was addicted to gambling

The couple married each other twice during their relationship. For the first time they were married for two years, and divorced. A few months later, they went back to each other, and signed a prenuptial agreement. Under the agreement, the couple decided to fully share property of all the assets registered in their name, and stipulated that in the event of a separation each of them would own half of the property. The two married each other, but soon their relationship ran aground again, and they separated.

A few months after the separation, the husband filed a petition in the Family Court demanding that his wife pay him temporary alimony payments of NIS 42,500 a month. Among other things, he claimed that he had a serious illness that made it difficult for him to function, and as a result he was recognized as disabled at a rate of 100% by the National Insurance Institute. According to him, his only income is a pension of NIS 3,200 a month, while his wife earns NIS 27,000 a month from her work as an employee, and earns about NIS 85,000 a month from their joint business, which she has left in her hands after their separation.

According to the husband, since the financial agreement between the two agreed on full property sharing, and in light of his difficult medical condition, he demands half of the business' income, ie NIS 42,500 a month from it.

The wife, on the other hand, argued that while the husband's medical condition was not benign, there was no impediment to him working non-physical jobs.

According to her, her husband was missing everything before their marriage and he is missing everything even today - due to a severe gambling addiction problem.

According to the woman, even if it is determined that she must pay monthly alimony payments, the amount must be deducted from the monthly repayment of NIS 15,000 that she pays on loans she took out to repay her and her husband's joint debts.

"Gap of tens of thousands of shekels in income"

The Family Court granted the husband's request in part. He ordered the woman to pay the husband monthly payments of NIS 4,000. This is despite the fact that the husband has not proved that he is in financial distress, and has not submitted any document attesting to his income or his wife’s income. He also ordered the payment of temporary alimony in light of the husband's medical condition, and in light of the gap in the income of the two - which was proved by the wife herself.

The court noted in its decision that in any case, if the decision regarding alimony is changed at a later stage in the proceedings - the woman could be reimbursed from an apartment owned by the two.

The woman, who was shocked by the decision, submitted a request to the court for a stay of execution and a review of the decision, claiming, among other things, that it creates a clear inequality between the parties, when she bears all the joint obligations of the two. She further claimed that in any case she would not be able to be reimbursed from the two's shared apartment, since it was sold two years ago.

The Family Court denied the woman's request for a stay of execution of the decision, and the woman filed an application for leave to appeal to the district court.

According to her, the Family Court erred in ordering the payment of temporary alimony to the husband without any evidence to that effect.

She further argued that she might be in real trouble, as her husband claims that he is insolvent and destitute, and if the alimony decision is later changed she will not be able to repay it.

According to her, her husband presents himself as a caregiver, who is unable to work, even though in practice he is self-employed who can work and support himself.

"Reasonable decision in relation to the circumstances of the case

The Haifa District Court rejected, as stated, the request for leave to appeal filed by the wife, and ruled that the decision of the Family Court was reasonable in relation to the temporary alimony payments to the husband. This, in light of the income gaps between the parties and in light of the husband's medical condition.

The Honorable Justice Hananel Sharabi explained that in any case this is only a temporary decision, which is not final, and "as soon as it becomes clear after hearing the evidence that a mistake was made in determining the amount of alimony, it can be changed later in the proceedings."

* The author,

053-9374039

courtesy of Zap Legal

• Share on Facebook

• Share on WhatsApp

• Share on general

• Share on general

• Share on Twitter

• Share on Email