The defendant's arguments regarding the exclusion of the Property Relations Law in the marriage contract.
- Before the marriage contract was drafted, they discussed their future plans, and on the day of signing the contract, he arrived with his family members at the plaintiff's family home together with the marriage registrar.
- He and the plaintiff discussed the value of the deferred dowry and reached an agreement that it would be worth one hundred pounds of gold, and after this agreement, he turned to the sheikh and asked him that the marriage contract be in accordance with Sharia law with all its implications, and explained to him that there was a possibility of adding a condition that Israeli law would not apply.
- The marriage registrar explicitly explained to him the significance of the non-application of Israeli law, and after he, the marriage registrar, began to fill out the form and wrote down the amount of the dowry that had been agreed upon, he contacted the plaintiff in order to clarify with her the matter of Sharia law, and at the end of the ceremony, he, the defendant, understood from the plaintiff that the marriage registrar had explained to her the essence of the terms of the marriage agreement, including the applicability of Sharia law and the exclusion of Israeli law. Therefore, Sharia law should be applied to their marriage.
The defendant's arguments for the application of the Property Relations and Balance of Resources Law.
- To the extent that the court determines that a balance of resources should be made in accordance with the Property Relations Law, a division must be determined different from that set forth therein, in view of the fact that the plaintiff did not donate her full wealth and fortune to the family's welfare.
- The plaintiff claimed to him that she had a "degree in science", which in retrospect turned out to be incorrect, she tried to end her life and began to receive medication as a result, while he was the one who was involved in many tasks at home and at work, taking care of her personal, medical and mental needs.
- Despite the crisis in which the plaintiff found herself, he continued to encourage, help and support her so that she could continue her career, and she did indeed resume a "didactic diagnosis" course, when she also stopped her studies on the grounds that "it is difficult for her to work with young children", but she eventually completed her degree studies at the university.
- In 2009, the plaintiff asked to return and live in the north, while he respected her wishes despite his remote work, traveling back and forth on buses, while the plaintiff remained at home without work and depressed.
- From 2004 to 2014, the parties maintained a joint bank account, with the plaintiff, without any prior notice, opening a bank account in her name and transferring all her income to her new personal account, which, as far as he was concerned, supported her financially from the day of marriage until the day of separation, took care of the family's needs in all respects, including the education and upbringing of their joint children.
- Therefore, and since there is no contribution on the part of the plaintiff to the family unit, an equal distribution of the assets accumulated during the period of the parties' joint life must be deviated.
Discussion and Decision:
- The provisions of sections 1 and 2 of the Property Relations between Spouses Law, 5733-1973, hereinafter: "the Law", state that an agreement regulating prenuptial relations between spouses requires the approval of the Family Court or the religious court that has jurisdiction over matters of marriage and divorce of spouses.
Section 2(b) of the Law states as follows: