Family law isn’t only about divorce and custody—it often shapes the most personal decisions in our lives. Two recent cases in the Israeli Family Court shed light on what happens when deep disagreements arise between parents, or between spouses, and why clear agreements can prevent costly conflicts.
Case 1: Can a Teen Join Her Class Trip to Poland?
Divorced parents of a 16-year-old girl found themselves in court after they could not agree whether she should participate in her school’s educational journey to Poland.
- The mother’s stance: She supported her daughter joining this meaningful trip.
- The father’s objection: He claimed the experience might emotionally harm her—especially after October 7—and argued that security risks and antisemitism abroad made the trip unsafe.
Since their divorce agreement required both parents’ written consent for travel abroad, the mother turned to the Family Court in Jerusalem for permission.
The court’s process:
A guardian ad litem was appointed, who met with the girl. She expressed her deep desire to take part in the trip, acknowledging its emotional weight but emphasizing her confidence in handling it.
The ruling:
The judge gave significant weight to the daughter’s maturity and her clear wishes. The father’s concerns were not backed by professional evidence. Ultimately, the court authorized her to travel and allowed the mother to issue a passport without the father’s signature. The father was ordered to cover legal expenses.
Lesson learned:
When parents cannot agree, the child’s best interests remain the guiding principle—and in cases involving older children, the court may give substantial weight to the child’s mature and thoughtful position.
Case 2: Why a Prenuptial (or Post-Nuptial) Agreement Matters—Even After an Inheritance
Another case involved a couple who married in 2016. Two years later, the wife inherited about 1.24 million shekels from her late mother. Using this inheritance, the couple purchased an apartment. The husband contributed an additional 170,000 shekels, and together they took out a mortgage.
Importantly, before finalizing the purchase, they signed a post-nuptial agreement defining what would happen to the apartment if they separated.
When their marriage ended in 2023, the wife asked to enforce the agreement and transfer the apartment into her sole ownership, provided she repaid her husband’s contributions. The husband, however, insisted the apartment should be sold, with the profits split.
The ruling:
The court enforced the agreement exactly as written. The wife had the right to choose between two options: buying out her husband’s share or selling the apartment. Since she chose the first option, the husband could not force a sale.
Lesson learned:
Without a prenuptial or post-nuptial agreement, inherited funds used for joint purchases can easily become entangled as marital property. A clear, legally binding agreement ensures fairness and avoids painful disputes later.
Our Takeaway
These two cases highlight essential truths:
- Courts prioritize the best interests of the child and may give weight to teenagers’ own voices in disputes.
- Clear pre- or post-nuptial agreements can prevent years of uncertainty, especially when significant inheritances or family gifts are involved.
At our firm, we don’t just draft agreements—we help families communicate better. Our attorneys bring additional training in mediation, negotiation, and non-violent communication to ensure that sensitive issues are addressed respectfully and effectively.
Our recommendation: If you’re receiving gifts or inheritances—or navigating co-parenting decisions—don’t leave your future to chance. Consult with an experienced family law attorney and make sure your agreements reflect your true intentions.
