Court intervened — and the prenuptial agreement was cancelled: "Exploitation of extreme dependency"
A Haredi man signed a total waiver of his apartments just so his wife would not divorce him. The husband's psychologist determined that the decision was made when he was in a state of impaired judgment and when "the sword of the threat of divorce was placed over his neck." The judge ruled that this was an unconscionable transaction, and the agreement was cancelled.
The Family Court in Jerusalem recently ordered the cancellation of a prenuptial agreement, which had previously received the status of a court judgment, after it was determined that it was signed while taking severe advantage of the husband's distress and his extreme dependency on his wife due to the fear that she would divorce him.
The couple, Hasidim living in the area, married in 1997 through a match and brought four children into the world. Over the years, they managed to acquire several real estate properties. However, at the end of 2014, their relationship hit a rough patch and the wife filed for divorce, in which she detailed marital difficulties and claimed that her husband had difficulty functioning and was even "addicted to pornography."
While the proceedings were ongoing in the Rabbinical Court, both expressed a desire to try to reconcile. As part of this attempt, in 2015, the two signed a "divorce agreement or, alternatively, a reconciliation agreement."
Under the agreement, it was determined that all the apartments in their possession would pass to the exclusive ownership of the wife. The meaning of the clause was simple and unequivocal: in the event of a separation, the husband would find himself on the street, without a roof over his head and without any share in the property they had accumulated together.
Years later, when the wife sought to implement the agreement and strip the husband of his assets, the man turned to the court and asked to cancel the document. He argued through his representative, attorney Yehoshua Schwartz, that he had signed the document under "coercion, deception, and unconscionable transaction, and without any economic logic." Conversely, the wife argued through her representative, attorney Limor Hajjaj, that the agreement was fair, was made with full consent, and that the husband remembered to "protest with a delay of years."
In court it was revealed — the husband had no legal representation in the original agreement.
After examining the evidence and testimonies, Judge Ben-Dor Libel accepted the husband's position in full and determined that there were exceptional circumstances justifying the cancellation of the agreement. Among other things, it turned out that the document was drafted at the wife's initiative and by an attorney on her behalf only, while the husband did not receive legal representation, did not receive independent advice, and did not conduct any negotiations on the terms.
The turning point in the trial was the testimony of the psychologist who treated the husband at that time. The therapist described a complex mental state in which the man was in a state of total emotional dependency on his wife, and was terrified by the thought that she would leave him. "Preserving the relationship with the defendant was a supreme value," the psychologist explained, adding that this dependency severely impaired his ability to understand the consequences of his actions.
The judge determined that the wife was well aware of her husband's mental state and his willingness to sign any document as long as she would not divorce him:
"A bleak and extreme picture is painted in which the defendant exploited the plaintiff's distress, who was dependent on her and was willing to please her and fulfill all her demands, as long as the sword of the threat of divorce that was placed over his neck was removed."
The judge determined that the terms in the agreement were "discriminatory and completely unreasonable," cancelled the prenuptial agreement, returned the husband's rights to the assets, and ordered the wife to pay him legal expenses and attorney's fees in the amount of 70,000 shekels.
