She sued to cancel a divorce agreement: "I signed because I was afraid of my husband"
The ex-wife of a lawyer, who in the past was forced to stay in a shelter for battered women, claimed that her former partner hid accounts and assets from her, including in Switzerland. What did the court rule?
The Family Court in Jerusalem recently rejected a woman's lawsuit seeking to cancel her divorce agreement. The plaintiff claimed she signed the document under duress and fear of her husband, whom she accused of domestic violence that forced her to seek refuge in a shelter for battered women. Judge Moshe Braun ruled that she failed to substantiate her claims.
The couple divorced in early 2019. The signed agreement stipulated that "each party shall remain the owner of their assets," and that the woman would waive her ketubah and "any claim or lawsuit of a financial and/or proprietary nature against the husband and his family." However, four years later, she filed a lawsuit alleging "violence, rape, and mental abuse" suffered during the marriage. She argued that the agreement was signed in bad faith, under fear, and while she was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. She further accused her ex-husband, a lawyer by profession, of using his legal expertise to manipulate her and hide assets, including bank accounts, vehicles, and real estate in Switzerland.
The ex-husband dismissed these claims as "delusional" and a "fabricated fantasy," insisting that the agreement was signed voluntarily after months of negotiations. Judge Moshe Braun explained that a divorce agreement approved by the court carries the weight of a judicial ruling, requiring a particularly high burden of proof for its cancellation. The plaintiff failed to meet this threshold.
The court determined that the claim regarding her mental state at the time of signing was not supported by expert testimony. While medical records indicated a diagnosis of complex post-traumatic stress disorder "in response to traumatic events experienced from a young age," there was no proof of active trauma at the time of signing. Emotional distress alone is insufficient to invalidate a court-approved divorce agreement.
Regarding the alleged concealment of assets, the husband admitted to owning real estate in Switzerland but proved it was only a 3.7% inheritance from his grandmother, to which his ex-wife had no claim. The sale of a Mercedes was deemed legitimate, as the proceeds were used to pay off the vehicle's loan. The alleged hiding of a motorcycle was dismissed as trivial, as its value did not exceed ten thousand shekels, which the judge ruled did not constitute asset smuggling.
Consequently, the lawsuit was rejected, and the woman was ordered to pay 25,000 shekels in legal costs and attorney's fees to her ex-husband.
