Hand written wills

 Rhoda lived in New York City, she came to the United States after the Holocaust and may of her relatives lived in Israel.
She often visited Israel and she had a bank account in Bank Leumi in Tel Aviv.She decided that her money in Israel she would leave to her relatives after her death.Rhoda did not like Lawyers so she decided to write in her hand writing a last will and Testament. Rhoda died in New York and was a resident of New York State at the time of her death.
Is her hand written will valid?

Israeli Law states that the law that applies to Rhoda is the the Law of New York State because Rhoda was a resident of New York State at the time of her death.New York State does not recognize hand written wills, Israeli Law does recognize hand written wills.Will Rhoda's will be recognized in Israel and will her Israeli relatives receive the funds she left them in Bank Leumi? Many lawyers from the United States told me the will was invalid New York state does not recognize hand written wills. I was able to to solve the problem in the following way.New York State recognizes the right to bequeath assets by a last will and Testament.Therefore  the substantive law of New York State allows Rhoda to bequeath her assets via a Last will and Testament, the fact that the will was hand written (without witnesses) is a matter of  form and the form of the will is governed by Israeli Law.Rhoda's relatives received the the funds deposited in Bank Leumi.

Is earning power an asset ?

Ora and Ehud were both students when they met.Ora was studying to be a nurse and Ehud was studying to be a doctor.


They got married after Ora completed her nursing studies and for many years she supported Ehud during his long studies to become a surgeon.Ehud became a very successful surgeon and today is head of his department at the hospital he works at. Ora is the mother of three children and for most of her career she worked part time to allow her enough time to take care of the children. In the last few years the relationship between and Ora and Ehud has deteriorated and they have decided to get divorced.

The earning power of Ehud is much higher than the earning power of Ora. In fact from an economic point of view it is the major asset that Ehud has. The question is; is it an asset that has to balanced in accordance with the Law of Financial Relations between Couples. In other words does Ora have a claim against this asset ? The issue seems to have been resolved by the recent amendment to the law which gives the court the right to take into consideration the earning power of each of the parties when it decides how the assets should be balanced so that both parties come out of the marriage equally. How the distribution should be done is still not clear and is a matter of debate , we shall have to wait for more court decisions and precedents on this issue.

Payment of Mezanot (child support)

In divorce and family law disputes it is usual for the court to require the father to pay Mezanot (child support) to the mother.The mother can collect the money either directly from the father or by  opening a file in the the office of execution.The mother can also open a file with Bituach Leumi .If the mother opens a file with Bituach Leumi or   הוצאה לפועלit is absolutely essential that the father pay directly  to these institutions and not directly to the mother.There are situations where the mother receives money from Bituach Leumi and also from the father.She is required to report any sums she receives from the father to bituach leumi  and to hoza lephoel but she often does not. This situation may cause serious problems for the father. It is essential that the father have proof of  every payment he made in order to avoid future problems and in order to prove to bituach leuimi and hoza lephoel that he has fullfiled his obligations  with the judgement against him and made the required payments.

Financial Agreements between Spouses

In Israel many spouses to not have financial agreements. Many couples assume that any assets that they acquire during marriage are joint assets. This not necessarily true.

The law allows couples do make any financial agreement that they decide to make. The law stipulates that the agreement must be In writing and it must be certified. The certification process depends on when the agreement is made and signed. Prior to the marriage the couple can appear in front of a Notary and sign the document and have it certified. The couple can also have the agreement certified before the the marriage registrar. These options are not available after the marriage. The couple after the marriage must appear before a judge of the family court or a religious court in order to certify the financial agreement.

In the absence of a financial agreement chapter 3 of the Law of Financial Relations between Couples will take effect. The law recognizes the fact that during the marriage each party has the sole ownership of his/and her property and the assets acquired during the marriage are not joint property .Of course if the couple bought an asset together and registered the property as joint property as is usual in the case when a couple purchases a home the property will be joint property. On the dissolution of the marriage or a breakdown in the marriage as defined in the law the assets acquired by each spouse during the marriage must be balanced, with the assets of the other spouse. This means in principal that each party to the marriage should have assets equal in value to the other party when the marriage is dissolved or breaks down. The court has the authority to determine how the balancing (איזון) should take place.

The assets to be balanced include pensions social and social benefits. The court may also take into account the earning potential of a spouse if it was acquired during the marriage. Although in principal the assets should be equalized the court in special situations has the right to balance the assets not equally. The issue is often complicated and often leads to endless litigation.

Couples would be wise to seek legal counsel and sign financial agreements which conform with their wishes , and not leave the matter to the courts to decide in the event of the dissolution or break down of the marriage.

The Right to Travel Abroad

Israeli basic law which has been held to be constitutional states that all persons in Israel may leave the country either permanently or for a trip abroad. In spite of the constitutional right to leave the country Israeli courts routinely issue orders to prohibit a person from going abroad. These orders are usually issued ex parte without a full hearing. The courts will issue such orders in order to insure that a parent usually a father will not leave Israel without providing guarantees that he will return, and continue to support his children and sometimes even his wife.
The order is issued by a registrar who usually will order a full hearing to hear all sides, whithin a short time after the order is issued.In a global economy there is always a danger that these orders will be abused and cause damage as many people travel abroad on business.
Nevertheless the courts have ruled that in balancing the various rights and interests of all the concerned parties these orders are necessary. The Rabbinical courts will also issue such orders to prevent a woman from being abandoned by her husband a situation which may leave her an Aguna.

Joint Parenthood Joint custody

Should the general rule be as it is today, the mother gets custody of the children, the father pays child support and only gets visitation rights? Many judges and even more social workers believe that this is how it should be.The issue is currently being discussed and the ministry of Justice has set up a committee to study the matter. It is clear that was common in the past need not continue.Children need both parents, equally and the law and the courts will need to move with the times and adopt a new approach to the issues of child custody.

מזונות לילדים

לעתים אנשים שואלים מהו סכום הכסף שהורה צריך לשלם כמזונות לילדים, ולמה בדרך כלל אביו של הקטין חייב לשלם
הכנסת חוקקה החוק לתיקון דיני משפחה שקבע ששני ההורים חייבים לשלם מזונות עבור ילדיהם כל אחד בהתאם להכנסותיו, החוק התיימר להיות שיוויוני
הבעייה היא שהחוק לא חל על אנשים שיש להם דין אישי, זאת אומרת זה לא חל על יהודים, מוסלמים, או נוצרים בני עדה מוכרת ולכן החוק חל רק על אנשים שאין להם דין אישי ושהם ללא דת בעיקר אלו אנשים שבאו ממדינות ברית המועצות לשעבר שאינם יהודים ואין להם דת אחרת
הדין הדתי היהודי, מחייב רק את האב לשלם מזונות עבור ילדיו עד גיל 15 ומגיל 15 ועד גיל 18 החובה לשלם מזונות חל גם על האב וגם על האם מדיני צדקה כתוצאה מכך, כאשר מדובר בהוצאות החיוניות לקטין שהסכום נע מסביב לסך של: 1300 ש"ח לחודש רק האב חייב לשאת בהוצאות אלו
כאשר מדובר בהוצאות מעבר להוצאות החיוניות כמו חוגים, בגדים מיוחדים, טיפול רפואי שאינו כלול בסל הבריאות והוצאות אחרות האב והאם חייבים בתשלומים אלו בהתאם להכנסותיהם. כאשר האב מחוייב לשלם מזונות הוא גם חייב לשלם עבור מדור לקטין זאת אומרת אם האם והילדים גרים בשכירות בנוסף למזונות האב יהיה חייב לשלם עבור הוצאות המדור דהיינו עלות של הקטין בהוצאות הדיור המורכבות משכר דירה, ארנונה, חשמל ומים
החובה לשלם מזונות היא חובה לקטין ולא לאם הקטין. אמנם התשלום הוא לאם הקטין אך היא מקבלת את התשלום כאפוטורופוס הטבעי של הקטין והכסף מיועד לצרכיו של הקטין
לפעמים הכלל הזה אינו ברור לצדדים, יש מצבים שהאם/האישה מסכימה לקבל סכום מזונות פחות מהמינימום לעיתים כדי לזכות בהסכמת הבעל לגירושין או לקבל את חלקו בדירה או עקב סיבות אחרות. הסכם כזה יכול לחייב רק את האישה אך לא הקטין ולכן, יש מקרים שלאחר אישור ההסכם והגירושין האם חוזרת ומגישה תביעה מחודשת למזונות עבור הקטין ותובעת סכום יותר גבוה מהסכום שנקבע בהסכם הגירושין.בית המשפט לענייני משפחה ברוב המקרים יפסוק מזונות בהתאם לצרכיו של הקטין ולא יתחשב בסכום שנקבע בהסכם הגירושין, מכיוון שהסכם הגירושין לא מחייב את הקטין. גם בית הדין הרבני פוסק סכום מזונות לקטינים אך בהעדר הסכמת האם לסמכות של בית הדין הרבני בעניין מזונות הקטין היא רשאית לתבוע מזונות עבור הקטין בבית המשפט לעניייני משפחה. הנושא הוא מאוד מורכב, דבר שמאפיין דיני משפחה בכלל ולכן רצוי להתייעץ עם עו"ד מומחה בנושא זה