Cohabiting Without Agreement: No Maintenance Rights

Question:

My boyfriend suggests we live together and not get married. I am worried that I will not have financial security this way. Am I right ?

Answer:

Yes ! If you cohabit rather than marry you have no automatic right to be supported financiallly by your boyfriend – unless  if you make an agreement.

Financial Security Catch For Cohabiting Woman

Question

I have been dating a man who has been divorced twice, with children from both marriages. I love him. He has told me he wants our relationship to be permanent. I am worried that if I marry him, he’ll walk out as he did in his previous marriages. On the other hand, if I just live with him , I would be ‘freer’ but have less financial security if he walked out. We are both Jewish. He does not own an apartment. Which option gives me more financial security, marriage or cohabitation ?

Answer:

If a husband walks out on his wife and they were both married according to Jewish law, she is entitled to maintenance , until such time as they divorce. However, if a Jewish woman cohabits with a Jewish man without marriage she is not entitled to maintenance from him if they split up, unless she can prove there was an agreement between them regarding this . If the couple make a written agreement which covers the issue of maintenance then this is advantageous to the woman, but if the agreement is oral it will be more difficult to prove.

Being married to a man according to Jewish law provides a woman with more financial security in terms of being supported by him, than would be the case if she were to cohabit with him outside marriage. A Jewish woman who could have married her Jewish husband according to religious law but chose to marry in a civil ceremony is in a better position than she would be if she merely cohabited with him, but is in an inferior position compared to a wife married in a traditional Jewish ceremony. This is because their marriage is unrecognized by Jewish law and she has no automatic right to maintenance based on it. She must look to civil law for her right to support. This is more egalitarian than Jewish law, and takes her own income into account.

Cohabiting Without Agreement: Property Rights

Question:

Does a woman who lives with a man without marrying have fewer property rights than a married one if they make no agreement ?

Answer:

Once she  has proved her status and an intention to share property ,their rights are similar – but she must overcome a huge hurdle first. A married woman’s husband cannot deny his wife’s claim to partnership regarding marital property because she does not have to prove her status. In contrast, the boyfriend of a cohabitee can deny the substance of their relationship and the onus is on her to prove she has the status of a common-law wife. Even when she proves that, she must prove either a general intention to share property during the period of cohabitation, or an intention to share a specific property.

If she does manage to prove all this, then as a common-law wife she is entitled to half of the property acquired during the period of  cohabitation. The rights of a cohabiting woman who has not entered into a property relations agreement - but who has proved her status as a common-law wife and the required intention to share property- are similar to those of a woman who married before 1974.

Cohabitees – Responsibility For Debts

Question:

Is a common-law spouse responsible for debts the other one has accumulated while they have been living together ?

Answer:

In principle, yes, if the creditors sue the common-law spouse in court, and can prove that he/she was cohabiting with someone, then the fellow-cohabitee is liable for debts arising during the period of their cohabitation. The joint responsibility is not automatic; cohabitee status must be proved in court.

 
See Also "Property Rights – Unmarried Couples/Cohabitees" and
"Agreements – Between Cohabiting Couples."

Exit Order Against Ex-Cohabitee

Question :

Can a woman who splits up with a man she has lived with get an order stopping him leaving the country and dodging pleas for a division of property and child maintenance ?

Answer:

Yes, it is possible , depending on the particular circumstances. In 2002 the Kfar Saba family court granted an exit order against a former cohabitee of a woman who had filed him for a division of property and maintenance for their daughter. The couple had lived together for several years. The woman had presented credible evidence to the court showing that the respondent had heavy debts – and was planning to avoid them by leaving the country. The respondent had no property in Israel and had lived abroad for many years. Granting the order the court held that the woman had a good chance of getting a judgment in her favour and that the respondent’s intended departure from Israel would make it hard for the woman to enforce this. The damage she may incur by his departure would be greater than any damage he was likely to suffer because of the order, it held.

Flexibility In Cohabitation Test

Question:

Do a man and a woman who are a ‘couple’ without being married have to fit into a a stereotyped model of a relationship to qualify as being ‘cohabitees’ in the eyes of the law ?

Answer:

No, although if they do live together permanently in the same home, have intimate relations and share some of their finances, proving their status will be a lot simpler. Referring to the Supreme Court case of Alon v Mendelson where it was emphasized that there is not even a standard ‘recipe’ for ‘family life’ or ‘shared household’ among married couples, the Tel Aviv family court stressed in August 2002 that each case should be viewed on its own merits, and the relationship viewed as a whole, although its various aspects should obviously be considered.

Cohabitation Agreement – Partial  Proof of Cohabitee Status

Question:

Does the fact that a couple have made a cohabitation agreement constitute proof of their status as cohabitees ?

Answer:

Not complete proof. The fact that two people have drawn up an agreement declaring themselves to be cohabitees only provides evidence of their potential status i.e. is partial proof . In practice they could be living apart. Thus the agreement would form part of the evidence necessary to prove their status. They would still have to fulfil the other conditions , the main ones being habitation under the same roof and managing a common household.

Cohabitation With Foreigner

Question:

I am a foreigner with foreign nationality. Does the fact that I do not have Israeli citizenship prevent me from claiming rights derived from the status of a common-law spouse or cohabitee in Israel ?

Answer:

No ! Absence of Israeli citizenship does not prevent someone claiming rights of a cohabitee in Israel.

Mistress and Not Cohabitee

Question:

Is an single woman who is "going steady" with a married man likely to be regarded as his cohabitee or common-law wife ?

Answer:

Only if certain conditions established by the courts in leading cases exist. These include: living together, running a household together , intimate relations and some emotional element. A woman who meets a married man regularly but does not live with him and does not share a home with him is likely to be regarded as his mistress, but not his cohabitee or common-law wife, even if they have intimate relations and some emotional attachment.

Relalationship With Mutual Sleepovers  Is Not Cohabitation

Question:

I am a divorcee and my lady-friend a widow. Sometimes she spends the night in my apartment and sometimes I spend the night in hers. We are together most of the week. We each manage our own individual households. Does this mean she has the status of a “common-law wife” or cohabitee ?

Answer:

No. To qualify as cohabitees or common-law spouses a couple must fulfil certain criteria e.g. they must usually  live together under one household as man and wife and run it together . It is not enough to sleep at each others apartment in rotation. However, in the  Shukran Supreme Case it was stressed that the test should not be a rigid, objective one and the couple concerned were given the status of cohabitees even though they lived separately but sometimes lived in each other's apartment. Particular laws may demand that the parties actually live together on a proper basis to qualify as cohabitees.

Sleeping Together At Weekends – Not Cohabitation

Question:

Would a man and woman who are meet at weekends, staying in one of their apartments alternatively, but who do not cohabit during the week, be regarded as common-law spouses, if he also contributes to her rent ?

Answer:

No ! Cohabitation at weekends alone is insufficient to meet the criteria for common-law spouses or cohabitees, even if one party contributes financially to the other's rent. Cohabitation under one roof is a key element which is missing her and financially contribution towards the rent does not make up for this.'

Cohabitees- Are Intimate Relations Necessary ?

Question:

Do a man and woman who live together have to have intimate relations to qualify as having the status of cohabitees with property rights regarding  one another ?

Answer:

The Supreme Court has held that the traditional test of cohabitees is not black and white. One of the key elements of the test is that the sides live together as a couple and while intimate relations are presumed to be part of couplehood between a man and a woman, the Supreme court had held that a man and a woman can still be cohabitees when they cease to have intimate relations and even live in separate rooms. However, it is still much easier to prove the status of a cohabitee when a man and woman do have intimate relations and sleep in the same bedroom.

Cohabitee’s Rights and Other Sexual Relationships

Question:

I have been living with a woman for many years. Our relationship has soured of late and she has hinted at being entitled to part of my property. While neither of us is married to anyone else, I do have intimate relations with another woman, and have done so for years. Would this fact be in my favour and help to protect my rights if the woman I live with claims to be my common-law wife ?

Answer:

No ! The Supreme Court has held that a man or woman can still have the status of a cohabitee even if one of them has intimate relations with someone else. In the ‘90’s it held that a woman who lives with a man can still retain the status of a cohabitee or common-law wife even if she also has sexual relations with other men and still retains a high degree of intimacy with her ex-husband.

Cohabitation – Pensioners on Kibbutz

Question:

I live together with a woman on a kibbutz. We are both pensioners. One of us is a widow and one a divorcee. We did not want to get married for various reasons. Do we qualify as common-law man and wife , or does the fact that we are on a kibbutz, or pensioners, prevent this ?

Answer:

A man and a woman who are pensioners and who reside on a kibbutz can qualify as cohabitees providing that they fulfil the necessary legal requirements – the main ones being living together under one roof and running the household jointly.

Widow & Widower – Cohabitation

Question:

If a widow and widower live separately , each in their own apartment, but meet daily and occasionally sleep at one another's home, will they be regarded as "common-law spouses" ?

Answer:

No ! The fact that each of them runs his/her own household independently rules out the possibility of them qualifying as common-law spouses in the eyes of the law.  Living together and partnership in the financing and running of the home are key factors to acquiring such status.

Casual Relationship After Cohabitation

Question:

If a couple split up after cohabiting as common law spouses and just then date, living separately, but staying overnight with each other occasionally, do they regain their former status, and any rights/obligations it may give ?

Answer :

No – from the description given they would appear to fall short of the criteria required to become common law spouses again. To fall into this category once again they would have to cohabit, run the household jointly and intend to have this economic or financial partnership.

In April 2006 Hadera Family court rejected a plea by a man for a declaratory judgment declaring that he and his former cohabitee had regained their common law status because they dated whilst living separately following a split up, sometimes sleeping at one another's houses.The plaintiff had claimed he was entitled to 50% of certain property belonging to the defendant , and that she was responsible for half of the debts he incurred during their "2nd" relationship. Examining the evidence the court found that their relationship was just casual and lacked the key elements referred to above that are necessary for the status of cohabitees.

Divorced Couple Cohabit Without Marriage – Status

Question:

What is the legal status of two people who were married to one another, got divorced but then live together again ?

Answer:

A divorced couple who cohabit will acquire the status of common-law spouses or cohabitees provided they live together under one roof and run a common household. The fact that they were once married only strengthens their current status as cohabitees.

Lodger Turns Lover – Property Rights Issue

Question:

Is a woman entitled to half the property acquired by a man who started out as a lodger in her apartment – but then turned into her live-in lover for several years ?

Answer:

Not unless she can prove that their relationship was one of cohabitees and that there was an intention to share property acquired during this period. In June 2003 the Tel Aviv Family Court rejected a plea by a woman for a declaratory judgment declaring her and her ex-boyfriend to be  cohabitees and entitling her to half of property acquired by him during their relationship because she had not proved that they were cohabitees .

Initially the defendant was her lodger (without a written contract) in her apartment but they quickly became lovers . She admitted in her pleadings that they never had a joint bank account or joint savings, and that neither of them shared their money with the other and that they did not buy any property such as an apartment or car together. It was held the elements of “ joint effort” and “joint running of the home” were missing and that their relationship fell short of a common-law husband and wife. Furthermore, the court said that as the plaintiff had not proved actual partnership or an intention of such, it would reject her plea without even checking to see what property the defendant had acquired during this period.

Implications of Self-declaration as Prisoner's Cohabitee

Question :

My boyfriend is in jail. I would like to get permission to stay overnight with him in a special area designed for husbands and wives, so that we can have intimate relations . If I tell the prison authorities that we are common law spouses could this be to my detriment later , as I own my apartment ?

Answer:

Quite possibly – it could boomerang, being advantageous in the short term, allowing the couple to gain privacy in prison , but could prove detrimental in the long run by helping him to prove he is entitled to rights in his girlfriend's property by virtue of his status as a cohabitee !

A self-declaration to the prison authorities admitting to be the common-law spouse of a prisoner is certainly of evidential value. It could be denied later, if necessary , but there is no guarantee that the denial would succeed. While a legitimate common-law spouse or cohabitee is theoretically entitled to rights in his/her partner's property relating to the period they lived together, this depends on actually successfully proving one's status. Central to this is proving cohabitation under one roof and joint management of a common household. If, for example, a couple did actually cohabit and this cohabitation was interrupted by one party's imprisonment, then this would be regarded as a 'force major " – something beyond their control – which does not terminate their status, or any claim to property rights arising from it. Thus, a self-declaration admitting to a prisoner's status as a cohabitee could assist him later on in proving that he may be entitled to property rights because of his status.

Widow Loses Allowance Upon Cohabitation

Question:

Is a widow in danger of losing her dependant's allowance from the National Insurance if she just cohabits , rather than marries ?

Answer:

Not anymore ! In March 2007 the Labour Appeal Court held that a widow who becomes a cohabite loses her right to a dependant's allowance from the National Insurance Institute. It was held that a widow who cohabits is in the same position as if she had remarried. Previously, a widow only lost this right upon remarriage, not upon cohabitation.

Her allowance is not slashed rectroactively, however, but after a period of time of having been recognized as a cohabitee. A widower who cohabits is under a legal obligation to report on her new status within a year of becoming a cohabite, it was held.

In one case it was held that a widow become a cohabitee on the day she gave birth to a child with her partner, whilst in another case a widow  was held that she became a cohabitee a year after signing a property relations agreement and starting to cohabit.