Caselaw

Claims after the Litigation Settlement (Haifa) 45170-07-24 D. Y. v. S. C

January 22, 2026
Print
Family Court in Haifa
Claims after the settlement of litigation 45170-07-24 (property, man’s claim)

Claims after the settlement of litigation 80194-07-24 (property, woman’s claim)

Y. v. 20

 

Before The Honorable Judge Hila Gurevitz Ovadia
The plaintiff: D. 10, 16, ——

By Attorney for the Attorney General’s OfficeMoving the Hearing Venue of the Meller Foundation

Against
The defendant: S. 20, 16, ——-

By Attorney for Attorney Limor Suissa

 

Amended Judgment

(Amended by decision of 06/01/2026)

A claim for balancing resources filed by the man, in which he petitioned for the dissolution of the parties' apartment sharing and the division of the proceeds after reducing the mortgage payment in equal parts, and a property claim filed by the woman for a balance of resources that was not halfway through.  For convenience, the man will be called "the plaintiff" and the woman will be called "the defendant."

The parties and their arguments:

  1. The parties are ex-spouses who were married on 00/00/2008.
  2. On 01/07/2024, the parties separated their residences and the plaintiff moved into a rented apartment.
  3. The date of the rupture was set for 01/05/2024 (decision of 16.12.2024).
  4. The parties are parents of two minors, A. born 01/2009 and N. born 02/2017.
  5. The parties own an apartment on XX X XXX Street, known as Sub-Plot X in Plot XX Block XX (hereinafter: the "Apartment").
  6. The plaintiff is self-employed in the field of ..., works from home, and has one main client - XXX; the defendant instructs ....
  7. Prior to the filing of the claims, the parties conducted a mediation process, in which they prepared a real estate appraisal opinion and an opinion on the balancing of resources for the parties;
  8. The plaintiff filed a claim for a balance of resources; as part of the lawsuit, he petitioned to dissolve the partnership in the apartment immediately and to divide the proceeds after reducing the mortgage payment in equal parts; the lawsuit argued that the defendant's claim that she was entitled to more than half of the consideration should be rejected because the rights in the apartment were purchased with equity derived from the defendant's inheritance. The plaintiff also petitioned for payment of usage fees, balancing resources according to the opinion conducted in the mediation, reimbursement of payments he had paid for joint debts after the date of the rupture, distribution of movables, dissolution of partnership in vehicles, and balancing of debit balances in bank accounts.  The plaintiff also filed a claim for equal time of stay and a claim for child support.
  9. The defendant filed a property claim; in the lawsuit it was claimed that the plaintiff "benefited over the years" from inheritance money received by the defendant, both for the purchase of the apartment and for its renovation and other expenses. The defendant petitioned that the price of the apartment would be divided unequally after taking into account "all the money inherited by the defendant that was used for the purchase of the apartment and its renovation."  The defendant  also petitioned that the balance of resources would also be done in an unequal division and according to the opinion prepared for the parties in the mediation process with changes and additions, regarding wage differences and valuation of the plaintiff's business, balancing bank accounts, income that was "deferred" after the date of the rupture, personal expenses of the plaintiff on the account of the business and sums spent on planning the divorce proceeding.

It was claimed that in order to finance a surrogacy process for the birth of the minor,  the defendant's mother transferred to the defendant the sum of NIS 100,000 at the expense of her future inheritance.  It was also claimed that from her mother's inheritance after the sale of real estate, the sum of NIS 1,125,000 was transferred (in exchange for an inheritance apartment that was sold).  It was argued that since at that time the parties were in negotiations to purchase the apartment, the joint account served only as a "conduit" for the transfer of the funds, since the defendant did not have a separate bank account in its name.  It was claimed that the apartment was purchased for the sum of NIS 1,800,000, the parties took out a mortgage in the sum of NIS 1,250,000, declared equity in the sum of NIS 550,000, invested NIS 200,000 from the inheritance funds for its renovation, financed additional expenses in the purchase of approximately NIS 55,000 and also partially repaid the mortgage in the sum of NIS 172,510 of the balance of the inheritance funds.

1
2...13Next part