Court Rules Man Not Obligated to Share Post-Breakup Compensation
Translated & summarized from Mako by baba
A Haifa family court ruled that a man injured in a road accident is not required to share over three million shekels in compensation received after his separation from his partner. The court distinguished between funds received during the relationship and those received post-breakup. The man had received a total of over four million shekels, with one million deposited into a joint account before separation and the remainder after. The ruling considered the timing of the payments and the intent of the parties.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- A man is not required to share over 3 million shekels in compensation received after separating from his partner.
- The Haifa Family Court ruled on the division of insurance payouts following a severe road accident.
- The couple lived together for 17 years and had three children before separating.
- One million shekels received during the relationship was deemed shareable.
- The court cited the timing of payments and intent to avoid double compensation.
A man who received over four million shekels in compensation from insurance companies following a severe road accident will not be required to share the majority of these funds with his former partner, a family court in Haifa has ruled. The couple had been in a common-law marriage for 17 years and had three children.
The man, who worked in high-tech, was injured in a road accident about a decade ago, rendering him unable to return to work. He has been living off insurance payouts since then. One insurance company paid him one million shekels while the couple was still living together, which he deposited into their joint account. A second insurance company paid him 3,690,000 shekels after they had separated.
The former partner demanded a share of the compensation, arguing she was entitled to half of all payouts due to expenses paid from their joint account and because she was the sole breadwinner after the accident. She had also previously left the home, taking 90,000 shekels with her, which the man had sued to recover.
Deputy President of the Family Court, Tal Paperni, ruled that the man intended to share the first payout of one million shekels, received while they were still together, as evidenced by his actions and statements. However, the judge determined that the larger sum of 3,690,000 shekels, received after the couple's separation, was not intended for sharing. The court reasoned that requiring the partner to share this post-breakup sum would constitute double compensation, as she already benefited from the shared funds from the first payout.
Judge Paperni noted that the concept of shared intent typically applies to funds already possessed, not future, uncertain amounts. He also took into account the nine years that had passed since the accident and the man's ongoing need for rehabilitation. The court did not award costs and referred the 90,000 shekels taken by the woman to a court expert for balancing according to the ruling.
