Man Wins Half Ownership of Home After 31-Year Unmarried Relationship

A man has been awarded 50% ownership of a home he shared with his former partner for over three decades, following a legal battle after their separation. The couple lived together as common-law partners from 1992 to 2023 but never married and maintained separate finances. They purchased their first apartment in Ashkelon in 2000, which they sold in 2007. The proceeds, along with a mortgage, were used to buy their current home, which was registered solely in the woman's name.

Following their 2023 breakup, the man, a retired Ministry of Education employee, sued for a declaration of joint ownership. He claimed that he was promised future registration of his name on the property deed and that he solely paid off the mortgage between 2011 and 2020. He presented this as evidence of an implied trust relationship, stating he agreed to the sole registration based on legal advice and trust in his partner.

The woman, a retired psychotherapist, argued that she funded most of the purchase and that the sole registration was a correction from a previous property where she had to register it in her ex-partner's name under pressure. She contended the man's mortgage payments were akin to reduced rent for living in the house, for which he also received domestic services.

The Ashdod Family Court, however, ruled in favor of the man. Judge Hila Ohayon Glicksman noted that the couple's long-term cohabitation, shared household, and the fact that their grandchildren referred to them as grandparents contradicted the woman's claim of separate ownership. The judge also highlighted that mortgage payments increase equity, making the man's sole payments difficult to explain if he didn't believe he had a stake in the property.

Crucially, the court found support for the man's claim in mutual wills signed in 2012, which stipulated that the woman's share of the house would pass to him upon her death. The judge noted that the woman's subsequent unilateral change to her will in 2019, without informing her partner, strengthened the suspicion that she acknowledged his ownership rights. The court dismissed the testimony of the couple's former lawyer, finding it contradictory, and rejected the woman's defense of estoppel based on a National Insurance Institute declaration.

In its ruling, the court declared the man a 50% owner of the home, stating the woman's refusal to transfer his share demonstrated bad faith. The judge also criticized both parties for prolonging the legal proceedings with repeated requests for postponements and excessive filings, which hindered efficiency and wasted judicial time. The woman was ordered to pay reduced court costs of NIS 15,000.