Registration of rights in the residence and in part ... On which it is built
- There is no dispute that the rights in the land on which the residence was built are registered in the Land Registry Office... In the ... .. Different Appeal Warm and Two Brothers (Different Appeal Hot...., a different appeal of his brother S. .... And the appeal of his brother M. ...) by virtue of "Inheritance by Agreement" dated June 29, 2022, and other parts of a different appeal are registered, H, M, and A. by virtue of a "sale without consideration" from the years 2010 and 2012. (The wording of the registration was attached to the appeal against the decision of the Registrar).
Applicable Law - General
- According to Section 125 of the Land Law, 5729-1969 (hereinafter: "the Land Law") registration is of great proprietary importance, the section states that: "Registration in the registers regarding regulated land shall constitute conclusive evidence of its content..." This presumption is intended to protect the public interest, which will be able to rely on the registration, and to know that the registration is final, reliable and correctly reflects the rights registered (Civil Appeal 4140/97 The Hebrew University of Jerusalem v. Hadassah Women's Zionist Organization in America, IsrSC 35 (3) 49 (1999)).
- Notwithstanding the aforesaid, section 125(a) of the Land Law does not constitute an "absolute presumption", but rather we are dealing with a presumption that can be undermined (see: Civil Appeal 371/85 Philip v. Rosenberg et al. IsrSC 42(1) 584 (1988)), but the burden of contradicting it is not easy (Civil Appeal 2576/03 Weinberg v. Custodian General of Absentee Property [Nevo] (February 21, 2007)).
- The burden of proving that the registration in the land registers does not reflect the status of the rights in the land is usually a heavy burden, as stated, and it is placed on the shoulders of the party seeking to contradict the registration.
- In our case, the house today is not registered in the name of any of the parties, but in the name of the father-in-law by virtue of inheritance, and when the registration is "external" to the family unit, the burden of proof required is higher - real and weighty proof is required that the house, which is not registered in the name of any of the spouses, does indeed belong to them. In this context, in the Tax Appeal (Haifa) 330/05 Anonymous v. Anonymous [Nevo] (28 May 2006), it was ruled as follows:
"When the ownership of the residential apartment belongs to third parties and not to one of the spouses. Between them and the woman, there is no 'special relationship of partnership that stems from marital life' (the Yaacobi case, above) and the amount of evidence required to raise the burden of proof to a greater extent than that required between spouses."
- The parties married in 2011, so that their economic relationship is governed by the Property Relations between Spouses Law, 5733-1973 (hereinafter: the "Law"). The parties divorced in the Sharia Court on 00.00.2022. No prenuptial agreement was signed between the parties, and the parties remained divided over the following property:
- The residential apartment on the top floor of a building built in the ... .. (Eviction Claim and Wife's Claim) - Initially, there was an old building in which the man's parents lived, and the couple moved into an apartment under the man's parents when they were married. In 2016, the building was demolished and construction of a new building began, and after the construction was completed, the couple moved into an apartment on the top floor, Ham and his wife on the floor below, and the rest of the building was used for commerce. Between the demolition and the completion of the new construction, the couple and the father-in-law and his wife lived in a rented apartment.
- Dissolution of partnership in the apartment, and return of investments (the wife's claim).
The woman, in her summaries and in her conduct in the case, abandoned the claim to balance resources, except for the apartment. There is no argument on the matter in the summaries, an expert opinion appointed was not submitted, and it was not announced that the parties paid his salary or part of it. The expert was appointed on August 15, 2023, and a number of extensions were granted for the production of the documents at the request of the woman's counsel (on September 28, 2023, November 12, 2023, February 28, 2024, and March 3, 2024). The man eventually presented a confirmation that he had given the expert documents, and the woman also attached an email stating that she had given the expert an affidavit stating that she had not accumulated any assets.
- Therefore, I reject the woman's claim for balancing resources and dissolving the partnership of assets other than the apartment, the matter of which will be discussed at length in the judgment.
- Section 4 of the law states that:
"The dissolution of the marriage or its existence in itself does not harm the property of the spouses, grant one of them rights in the other's property or impose liability on him for the debts of the other."
- Since no prenuptial agreement has been drawn up between the parties, they are subject to the arrangement set forth in section 5 of the Law, which distinguishes between the joint venture assets and external assets, and states:
")a) Upon dissolution of the marriage or upon the termination of the marriage due to the death of a spouse (in this law - the termination of the marriage), each spouse is entitled to half of the value of all the couple's assets, except: