Property

You can ask the family court for  permission to repair and re-let the apartment and give instructions on this, within the property proceedings that exist between you. If necessary,the court  can give instructions for a special bank account to be set up ,into which the rent can be paid,and for the repairs to be paid for from this, and can even appoint a trustee/s  (for example, each party’s lawyer) to manage this process .

Not without prior permission from court - you would have to persuade it that the sale is in the minor children's good, and you would have to act under strict instructions given concerning your proposed plan, too, to protect their property rights, even if your application was approved. 

Under the 1962 Legal Capacity and Guardianship Act ,even though parents are their minor children's natural guardians they cannot act to sell their real estate rights without court permission and under its direction. The court is seen as acting to protect the minors' interests.

Not without prior permission from court - you would have to persuade it that the sale is in the minor children's good, and you would have to act under strict instructions given concerning your proposed plan,too, to protect their property rights, even if your application was approved. 

Under the 1962 Legal Capacity and Guardianship Act ,even though parents are their minor children's natural guardians they cannot act to sell their real estate rights without court permission and under its direction. The court is seen as acting to protect the minors' interests.

It must be in writing (as opposed to being an oral agreement), and be authorised by court. You must both attend the court hearing to authorise the agreement. The judge will only authorise the agreement and grant a judgment giving it full legal validity if he is satisfied that both of you signed it of your own free will, without any pressure/blackmail,and that you are aware of its contents,meaning and implications. He may question you about the agreement and will not authorise it unless he is completely satisfied about these issues.

An agreement between a married couple that is not authorised by court is not fully binding.

Yes, according to the legislation covering I.D.F. widows' benefits, a widow who loses her right to the benefit upon remarriage will be entitled to it once again, if she divorces.

Yes, according to legislation from 1950 covering I.D.F. widows' benefits,you are likely to forego your benefit if you remarry. However,mutual children you have will still be entitled to any benefit they receive under the legislation, even if you remarry. 

No- it is your husband's,too !Usually property acquired during the course of a marriage belongs to both spouses, irrespective of whether it is registered in the name of both husband and wife, or just one of them. The fact that a married couple have separate bank accounts does not adversely the property rights of either of them.

No! Disability allowance paid to one spouse is not joint,marital property,but belongs exclusively to the person entitled to it. Accordingly, if you divorce you are not entitled to a share of your husband's monthly state disability allowance.

Yes! Either of you,as joint owners of your marital home, is entitled to prevent 'unwelcome guests' from entering real estate you own together,including the apartment. 'Welcome guests' have permission or  'licence' to be on your property, and that must be given by each of you, as joint owners. As your joint ownership relates to the whole property,both of you must consent to and permit someone to be a guest. For  you, your wife's children are 'unwanted guests' and 'trespassers', while for her they are 'welcome guests' with a licence to be there.

In this situation, your interest and right to  prevent an 'unwelcome guest' ,who is 'thrust upon' you,from entering your home takes precedence over your wife's right to allow someone to enter. Only mutual agreement can really ease the situation. While legal action can be used here to enforce your rights, this  could backfire and aggravate the delicate relationship with your wife.

If your marital assets are registered in joint names,these can be divided up without further delay, even if you remain married.  If, however, they are registered in only one of your names , and you remain married, but separated,you will need either mutual consent to divide up your financial partnership in them, or you will have to wait a minimum of nine months from the time of your separation until they can be divided. Until a November 2008 amendment to the 1973 Spouses' Property Relations ACt, couples marrying on or after 1.1.74, like you, had to wait until divorce or death before assets registered in only one party's name could be divided, if there was no mutual consent.

Not necessarily. Assets registered in joint names can be divided up before the divorce itself is completed. Until recently,however, under Israeli law, couples who married after 1.1.74, as opposed to those marrying before that time, had to wait until they divorced before assets registered in only one of their names  only ,could be divided, unless both of them agreed.  However, since a November 2008 amendment to the 1973 Spouses' Property Relations' Act, even assets registered in one party's name,where the marriage took place after 1.1.74, can be divided up before the actual divorce - subject to certain conditions.

Definitely - this is incorrect! There is absolutely  no bar on you registering it in your own name, even if you are not a citizen. Real estate property purchased from pre-marital resources by one party is not joint property , according to Israeli law, and your wife's action appears to be manipulative. 

Her 'tips' on registration of the property  in her sole name or joint names could be an attempt to create or indicate an intention on your part to make her a gift of 50%-100% of the property. However, Israeli law has very clear and specific instructions about documentation needed to prove an intention to make a gift of real estate. Registration of property rights in another person's name, even a spouse's, does not , by itself, indicate such an intention !

No! This is a myth - your rights in marital property are not affected in any way if you leave the property , whether your departure is justified or not. There is often confusion over this - in Jewish law a wife who leaves the marital home unjustifiably can lose her rights to her own maintenance, during the marriage. This, however, has  nothing to do with her  property rights, which remain unaffected by her departure.

On the face of it,  no ! In principle, a business which was founded before a couple married, will not be regarded as joint property. Accordingly, debts created in that business should not be 'shared' with the other  marital partner, who was not involved at all in the running, management or opening of the business.

Usually when a couple separate permanently, the date of their separation marks the end of the financial partnership between them (or, in the words of the law, the time of 'balancing of financial resources'). However, if one party buys an expensive asset like a sports car, shortly after separating, it is reasonable to assume that it was purchased from joint resources acquired before the split,  in which case it would be regarded as marital or shared  property. Every case,  however,  is decided on its particular facts and circumstances.

No!Usually property acquired during the course of marriage, and registered in one party's name, is joint property, regardless of whether it is registered in one or in joint names. The fact that the couple have separate bank accounts does not , in itself, alter that assumption.

Firstly, there is no connection between divorce and opening and closing bank accounts. A married person can do this at any stage of marriage - providing it is not a joint account. This requires co-operation, both opening and closing it. Neither husand or wife is entitled to make a unilateral decision to close a joint bank account. However, both parties are entitled to give instructions restricting its use e.g. so that a joint signature is required for money to be spent etc. This, however, can bring a bank account to a standstill, although it still remains open.

In principle, property registered in one party's name only, that was acquired during the marriage, is still prima facia jointly owned, unless it was obtained by way of gift or inheritance, or , for example, it comes from pre-marital resources and there was no proven intention for it to become shared.

No ! Under the 1973 Spouses' Property Relations' Act, which applies to couples marrying from 1.1.74 onwards, property owned by one spouse prior to marriage remains their individual, and exclusive property. It does not enter into the pool of marital property to be balanced out .

No! Property inherited by one spouse , even during the course of marriage, is not regarded as joint or common property to be balanced out between them as part of the equalization or property balancing process applicable to couples marrying on or after 1.1.74, under Israeli law.