Jerusalem Court Cancels Prenuptial Agreement, Orders Equal Property Division Between Couple
Translated & summarized from Mako by baba
A Jerusalem family court annulled a prenuptial agreement signed 11 years ago, ruling the wife exploited the husband's dependence. The original agreement gave her exclusive ownership of two apartments, but the court ordered equal division after finding the husband signed under duress without legal advice.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Jerusalem court canceled an 11-year-old prenuptial agreement due to exploitation claims.
- The wife was granted exclusive ownership of two apartments under the original agreement.
- Judge ruled husband signed under extreme dependence, without independent legal counsel.
- Husband had no bank account; wife controlled all finances and misled him about the agreement.
- Court ordered equal division of the apartments following the annulment.
- Attorney noted prenuptial agreements can be overturned if proven unfair or coerced.
In a rare legal decision, a Jerusalem family court judge annulled a prenuptial agreement signed 11 years ago between a couple from the Haredi community, ruling that the wife exploited the husband's extreme dependence on her. The original agreement granted the wife exclusive ownership of two jointly purchased apartments, including their residence, while the husband retained only his social and pension rights and his bank account. The judge determined the husband signed the agreement under duress, without independent legal counsel or negotiation, and that the agreement was one-sided and left him with nothing.
The couple, married for 28 years with four children, had acquired the apartments partly with the husband's parents' funds. The prenuptial agreement was approved by the family court at the time but was challenged three years ago when the wife sought to enforce it and the husband filed to annul it. Judge Orit Ben-Dor Libal ruled that the husband was heavily dependent on his wife, who controlled all finances and forbade him from having a bank account. She found the agreement was drafted by the wife's lawyer without the husband's independent advice and that he believed it was a "drawer agreement" not intended for enforcement.
The judge criticized the wife for taking advantage of the husband's vulnerability and for misleading him about the agreement's purpose. She noted that enforcing the original agreement would have left the husband homeless and financially destitute. Consequently, the court canceled the prenuptial agreement and ordered the two apartments to be divided equally between the spouses.
Family law attorney Amir Cohen explained that while prenuptial agreements approved by courts aim to provide certainty and avoid costly disputes, they can be overturned in exceptional cases where one party proves coercion or unfairness. This ruling underscores that even multi-million shekel agreements are subject to judicial scrutiny and highlights the importance of clear legal strategies throughout such proceedings.
