12-34-56-78 Chekhov v. State of Israel, P.D. 51 (2)
For the sake of illustration and simplification, I will present below in the diagram the manner in which the deceased's estate was divided between the appellant and the respondent, in accordance with the judgment of the Family Court (the numerical ratios represent, as stated, parts of the deceased's estate):
- The Family Court rejected the appellant's argument that there is no room to distinguish between the types of siblings in the context in question, and that therefore, all of the testator's siblings - those from both parents and those from only one parent - must inherit equal parts of his estate. The court noted that this argument of the appellant is based on the judgment in the estate case (Family Tel Aviv) 44229-11-17 Anonymous vs. Anonymous [Nevo] (April 1,2019) (hereinafter: Estate Portfolio 44229-11-17 [Nevo]), within which such a position was adopted; and emphasized that there was an agreement for the equal division of the estate between the parties, whereas in our case there is no similar agreement. The court further noted that an appeal against This Judgment It was deleted after the appellants there withdrew their appeal on the recommendation of the District Court, in view of the existence of the said agreement, and while it was clarified that the court's proposal "does not imply agreement to the legal decision expressed in the judgment, with regard to the division of the inheritance in the situation discussed in the framework thereof. [...] The issue of division, from a legal point of view, in the situation that is the subject of the judgment will be decided in due course."Family Appeal (Tel Aviv District) 52390-05-19 Anonymous vs. Anonymous [Nevo] (March 12,2020)). Therefore, it was determined that there is no room to infer fromEstate Portfolio 44229-11-17 [Nevo] For our purposes.
- It was further noted that after the mother's death, the respondent signed a document, which was predicted to be a notice of withdrawal from the mother's estate in favor of the appellant; and that the respondent did not even dispute this. However, it was held that since the mother's inheritance order was not submitted to the court, in the framework of which the said withdrawal was expressed, the starting point is that the respondent did not withdraw from her estate in favor of the appellant. It was further held that "to the extent that in the future an inheritance order is issued according to which the defendant [the appellant - Y.] inherits the plaintiff's [respondent Y.] share in the estate of the deceased's mother (due to the plaintiff's withdrawal), this may affect the inheritance order that is now given to the estate of the deceased."
The appellant filed an appeal against this judgment with the District Court.