In a rare legal development, Judge Orit Ben Dor-Libel of the Jerusalem Family Court ordered the cancellation of a prenuptial agreement that was signed and ratified 11 years ago. The ruling was issued during divorce proceedings between a Haredi couple married for 28 years, uncovering a history of extreme power imbalances marked by deep emotional and financial dependency. The original agreement, previously approved by the court, stipulated that both of the couple’s joint apartments would transfer solely to the wife in the event of a separation, while each party would retain only the social rights registered in their own name.
In practice, this would have left the husband destitute and homeless. Judge Ben Dor-Libel accepted the husband's claims, finding that he had met the heavy burden of proof required to nullify a ratified agreement. The court’s reasoning indicates that the husband signed the document out of fear of losing the relationship, while under his wife's influence and without receiving independent legal advice or negotiating the terms. Furthermore, it was found that the husband believed the document was merely a "contingency agreement" meant to protect assets from creditors due to his debts, and that there was no genuine intent for it to serve as a separation settlement.
The court noted that the wife was well aware of her husband's vulnerability and used it manipulatively to secure a deal granting her immense financial advantages while leaving her spouse without significant resources. The judge emphasized that the original procedure in which the agreement was approved was purely formal and failed to reflect the complex factual reality of the couple's lives. As a consequence of the nullification, the court ordered that the apartments, purchased during the marriage, be divided equally between the parties.
Legal experts note that this ruling highlights that even prenuptial agreements granted the force of a court order are not immune to judicial scrutiny, particularly when flaws in consent or the exploitation of dependency are proven. It serves as a legal reminder of the importance of independent representation and fair balance when drafting binding documents that affect a couple's financial future.