Jerusalem Court Cancels Prenuptial Agreement Over Husband's Extreme Dependence on Wife

In a rare ruling, a Jerusalem family court judge annulled a prenuptial agreement approved 11 years ago, citing exploitation of the husband's extreme dependence on his wife. The agreement had stipulated that two jointly owned apartments, including their residence, would become the wife's sole property. The judge ruled that the husband signed the agreement without independent legal advice or negotiation, under significant pressure and dependence on his wife, leaving him with nothing if the agreement were enforced.

The couple, from the Haredi community, were married for 28 years and have four children. They purchased two apartments partly funded by the husband's parents. Eighteen years into the marriage, amid marital tensions, they signed the prenuptial agreement to address potential divorce scenarios. The agreement granted the wife exclusive ownership of the apartments, while each retained their own social and pension rights and bank accounts. The agreement had previously been approved by the family court.

Three years ago, before their divorce, the wife sought to enforce the agreement, while the husband filed to cancel it. Judge Orit Ben-Dor Libel found that the husband proved he signed under duress due to his extreme dependence on his wife, who controlled all finances and forbade him from having a bank account. The agreement was drafted by the wife's lawyer without the husband's independent counsel or negotiation. The judge noted the husband was burdened by debts and addictions, and the wife exploited his vulnerability by presenting the agreement as a "drawer agreement" not intended for enforcement.

The judge criticized the one-sided nature of the agreement, which would have left the husband homeless and financially destitute, while the wife retained all real estate and pension rights. She concluded the wife knowingly took advantage of the husband's weakness to secure an agreement heavily favoring her. Family law expert 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 like this where evidence supports one party's lack of free consent.

Following the ruling, ownership of the apartments will be equally divided between the spouses, reversing the original agreement's terms.