Jerusalem Court Orders Husband to Share Hidden Luxury Penthouse in Divorce Settlement
Translated & summarized from Mako by baba
A Jerusalem court upheld a prenuptial agreement but ruled the husband must compensate his wife for a concealed luxury penthouse valued at millions of shekels. The wife’s broader claims of hidden assets were mostly rejected due to lack of evidence. The ruling underscores the legal consequences of hiding assets in divorce settlements.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Jerusalem Family Court upheld a prenuptial agreement signed in 2018 between a married couple.
- The wife alleged the husband hid assets including a US bank account, warehouse, cottage, and penthouse.
- Most claims were rejected except for the concealed penthouse valued at 3.5-4.5 million shekels.
- The husband admitted hiding the penthouse, claiming it was a gift, but evidence disproved this.
- The court ordered the husband to pay half the penthouse value plus interest and legal fees.
- The prenuptial agreement remains valid, but undisclosed assets cannot be protected by false gift claims.
A Jerusalem Family Court recently ruled against a wife's request to annul a prenuptial agreement but ordered the husband to compensate her for a luxury penthouse he concealed. The couple, married since late 2003 with two children, signed a prenuptial agreement in March 2018 establishing full separation of property. In July 2019, the wife filed to cancel the agreement, alleging the husband misrepresented his business status and hid assets including a US bank account with nearly $400,000, a warehouse, a cottage, and a penthouse.
Judge Moshe Brown dismissed most of the wife's claims due to insufficient evidence and the high burden of proof required to overturn a court-approved prenuptial agreement. The wife had acknowledged the husband's business might be worth more than initially stated, undermining her claim of deception. Evidence also showed she was aware of the US bank account balance prior to signing the agreement. Claims regarding the warehouse and cottage were similarly rejected.
The turning point came with the penthouse in Jerusalem, valued between 3.5 and 4.5 million shekels. The husband admitted to hiding this asset at the time of the agreement, claiming it was a gift from his parents and thus exempt from division. However, recordings and transcripts revealed the father sold the property to the husband years earlier, and the husband paid extra for rooftop rights. The parents’ refusal to testify further weakened the husband's case. The judge ruled the "gift" claim did not reflect reality and ordered the husband to pay the wife half the penthouse's value as of March 15, 2018, plus interest and linkage differentials.
The prenuptial agreement remains valid, but the husband must also cover legal fees totaling 40,000 shekels. The court emphasized that a court-approved prenuptial agreement is rarely overturned, but undisclosed assets cannot be shielded by false claims of gifts. This case highlights the legal risks of hiding assets in divorce proceedings and the importance of full disclosure.
Mentioned
