Mother-in-law sued to evict her daughter-in-law from the apartment - and won
For years, a couple lived in an apartment belonging to the husband's mother. After the separation, the woman remained there with the children and claimed: "I am also an owner of the property." But the court thought otherwise.
The Family Court in Petah Tikva recently granted a lawsuit filed by a woman for the eviction of her daughter-in-law — her son's estranged wife — from an apartment owned by her. Judge Daniel Sherez rejected the daughter-in-law's claim that the apartment also belongs to her, and ordered her to vacate the premises by October 2027.
The couple lived in the mother's apartment from 2009 until their separation, after which the husband left the home, while his spouse and children remained. In May of last year, the mother-in-law filed the eviction lawsuit. She stated that the property serves as her pension for old age, yet her daughter-in-law adamantly refuses to vacate and continues to live there without paying rent.
"I let them live there out of concern and from a place of caring," said the mother-in-law, "but I did not believe she would lead me to this place."
According to the plaintiff, she does not want any connection with her son's estranged wife and insists on the immediate vacation of the property. On the other hand, the daughter-in-law claimed "specific cooperation" regarding the apartment, arguing that this makes her an owner as well. She justified this by the long duration of the marriage, renovations allegedly performed by the couple, and a promise allegedly made by the mother-in-law that the apartment belonged to the couple. She further claimed that she and her husband had received an irrevocable right of use from his mother.
Judge Sherez rejected her arguments. He clarified that the claim of "specific cooperation" does not apply to the relationship between the daughter-in-law and the mother-in-law, who is the legal owner of the apartment. The verdict noted the daughter-in-law's own testimony, in which she offered to pay the mother-in-law for the residence, noting that:
"Whoever offers to pay consideration, it is clear that they do not view the apartment as their own."
Finally, the judge rejected the claim that the mother-in-law had granted an irrevocable license to reside in the apartment until the end of the divorce proceedings. The judge stated that the defendant wished to use the plaintiff as a "hostage" in her dispute with her husband, and that the owner is entitled to cancel such a license upon a change of circumstances. It was determined that the permission to reside was subject to an implied condition that family ties would remain intact; once the quarrels began, the mother-in-law was entitled to demand the daughter-in-law vacate.
The lawsuit was accepted, and an eviction order was issued for October 1, 2027. The daughter-in-law was ordered to pay 7,500 shekels in legal expenses and attorney's fees.
