Property Rights

Yes, but your wife, the spouse living abroadwill have to sign a notary’s power of attorney authorised at an Israeli Consulate abroad, which appoints you, the other spouse, to sell her rights in the car and transfer ownership in Israel . The original power of attorney will need to be sent to Israel in order for the change in ownership of the car to be effected.

Once money is transferred from an individual account owned by one spouse into a joint account held by the husband and wife it becomes mutual property -even its origin was property owned by only one party prior to the marriage. Both parties have equal rights to what is in the joint account.

The party who transferred the money may actually withdraw a sum equivalent to what he/she deposited from a personal account into a joint account, but this could be risky. A court could regard the money in the joint account as common property, and what was originally deposited in it as a present from the party depositing it from the moment it entered the account.

It is worth nothing – as long as a party keeps money owned by him/her prior to the marriage in a separate account in his/her sole name it remains his/her personal property, and is not joint property acquired by mutual effort during the time the parties lived together as a married couple.

The whole issue of presents given during marriage, especially jewellery and precious items, is far from being clear cut. What determines whether presents given by one party to the other during the marriage are gifts is the intention of the parties. This is to be learnt from their behaviour and from the particular circumstances. Property regarded as marital property is to be balanced out between the parties, according to the 1973 Spouses’ Property Relations Law, whereas gifts given by one to the other remain personal property, are not to be balanced out between them.

Several possibilities exist regarding jewellery and precious items – these could have been intended to be given as a gift, as an investment or even part of business stock. What appears to be the case here is that the gems made up into items of jewelry according to the wife’s instructions would appear to be intended as gifts, in which case her husband would have no right to claim they were joint property. If they were made up for particular occasions like birthdays or wedding anniversaries, this would reinforce the argument that they were intended to be personal presents. Where someone buys a large quantity of gems or gold, or jewelry which is valuable due to its type or quantity , and succeeds in persuading the court that he did so for investment or business purposes, then the court can declare it to be joint property, to be shared between the parties. It does not matter if the other party is allowed to wear it or use it as the intention is what counts.

The answer is not clear cut. What determines whether presents given by one spouse to another during the course of their marriage count as marital property to be balanced out between them when they divorce, according to the 1973 Spouses’ Property Relations Law, or not , is the parties’ intention . This is to be learnt from their behaviour and from the particular circumstances.

Several possibilities exist regarding jewellery, even though at first sight it would seem an item intended for personal use, and therefore, unlikely to be regarded as marital property. For example, ‘collectors’ items’ such as Kruggerand coins made into jewellery could be bought as an investment in which case they could be argued as being joint property. However, if such an item is given to mark an occasion such as a birthday or anniversary it is more likely to be regarded as something belonging exclusively to the receiver, rather than being marital property.

Not necessarily as it depends upon when the gift was given in relation to when someone is declared bankrupt.

Under the Bankruptcy Ordinance, which applies to individuals, gifts made in the two years immediately preceding a declaration of bankruptcy are automatically cancelled.

Gifts given between 2-10 years prior to the declaration of bankruptcy may still be valid if the recipient manages to prove two cumulative conditions – (1) that the giver was financially solvent (without the gift) when he gave it and (2) that after the gift was made rights in the property were transferred to the recipient.

If more than 10 years have passed since the donor was declared bankrupt then the gift holds.

Although the Bankruptcy Ordinance allows certain acts to be cancelled retrospectively in specific circumstances, the general rule is that if no legal restrictions have been put on a person’s control of his/her property, then the fact that he/she is in debt should not limit his/her freedom to do what he/she wants with it.

Extremely slim. When a spouse acquires an apartment by way of gift or inheritance, or buys it with his own money, but chooses to register it in the joint names of both parties, there is an assumption that the couple intended to balance out their property equally .

No ! In principle, a marital crisis cannot be used to turn the clock back and cancel a present given during the marriage, except in very specific circumstances where the gift was conditioned at the time .

The Supreme Court has summarized the situation regarding cancelling ‘conditional’ gifts: ‘ Someone who wishes to condition a gift with a cessation condition, or someone who wishes to put an obligation alongside the gift which he gives, must do this in a clear and identifiable way. In the absence of evidence, there is no room to claim the existence of a condition and no condition can be created that does not derive from a principle at the time the gift was made. The assumption is that a present is final and watertight when made and the fact that hopes for the future fade, is not, by itself grounds for showing that the gift is cancelled.’

Property received as a gift is one of the exceptions to the rule under the 1973 Spouses’ Property Relations Act that property acquired during the course of a marriage is joint property to be balanced out between the sides upon divorce. Thus a husband whose wife was given an apartment would have no legal claim on it should they divorce and it would remain the wife’s exclusive property.