| Family Court in Be’er Sheva |
| Family file 50483-06-24 L. N. S. |
| Before | The Honorable Judge Diana Pesso-Vago
|
|
| Plaintiff: | P.L.
By Adv. Roman Stachov |
|
|
Against
|
||
| Defendant: | H.S.
By Adv. Dan Malkieli |
|
| Judgment
|
Introduction
- We are dealing with an action to cancel a gift agreement made between the defendant and the late father of the parties, which granted the defendant full rights in a residential apartment on G.H. 20/2 on B (hereinafter: the "Property").
The plaintiff and the defendant are sisters and heirs according to the will of their deceased parents, which was drawn up on September 17, 1987 (hereinafter: the "Will").
On 09.03.22, the late mother of the parties, N.S. The late (hereinafter: "the deceased") and on April 27, 2023, their late father, V.S. z"l (hereinafter: "the deceased").
The property was purchased by the terms after the date of making the will, was registered in the name of the deceased in equal parts and upon the date of the death of the deceased, it was registered in its entirety in the name of the deceased. The rights of the deceased were transferred as a gift in full, to the defendant, and this transfer ended in registration.
The parties' arguments in summary:
The plaintiff's arguments:
- The parents of the parties, who have passed away, drafted a mutual will of the type "heir after heir" in their case, in which they ordered that upon the death of one of them, all of the other's property would pass to the surviving spouse. After both of them are gone, all their property will pass to the parties here, in equal parts.
After the deceased's death and in accordance with her will, the deceased inherited all of her property.
On October 27, 2022, the deceased transferred all the rights in the property to the defendant, and did so in contravention of the deceased's reliance interest, given that we are dealing with mutual wills, while emptying the provisions of the will from their contents, and therefore the transfer should be canceled.
After the death of the deceased, the defendant petitioned for a probate order, and afterwards, according to the plaintiff, it became clear to her that the rights in the property had been transferred.