Freedman, Topol & Co.

24/06/2024

Thinking about a prenuptial agreement? Do it right!

Freedman Topol & Co. Law Firm offers you professional legal guidance to ensure peace of mind and security when drafting your prenuptial agreement.

We are here to provide you with all the necessary information and assistance to complete the process in the best possible way.

• Personal and professional guidance throughout the entire process
• Assistance in drafting and customizing the prenuptial agreement
• Representation before relevant authorities and entities
• 25 years of experience and legal security

Contact us today and start the journey towards a correct and secure prenuptial agreement:
02-5901869

Derech Kedem 5, Ofer Mall, 3rd Floor, Ma'ale Adumim

Freedman Topol & Co. - 25 years of uncompromising professionalism.

16/06/2024

Looking to buy or sell property?
With 25 years of experience in real estate law, Freedman Topol & Co. ensures a smooth transaction for all your property needs.

- Expertise in Commercial and Residential Real Estate
- Personalized Service
- Trusted Legal Guidance

Contact us today at 02-5901869 to schedule a consultation and let our experienced team guide you through every step of the process.

Find us at: Derech Kedem 5, Ofer Mall, Ma'ale Adumim - 3rd Floor

Freedman Topol & Co. - Your success is our commitment.

11/06/2024

Happy Shavuot from Friedman Topol & Co. - Attorneys and Notaries!
Wishing you a holiday filled with joy, renewal, and prosperity.

Derech Kedem 5, Ma'ale Adumim.

27/07/2023

24/09/2022

Shana tova 🐟🍯🍎

07/06/2021

רכישת דירה או כל נכס הינה רכישה בסיכון גבוה ואם איננה מתבצעת בצורה נאותה ומקיפה עלולה לגרום לעגמת נפש והפסד כספי. פרידמן טופול ושות' - משרד עורכי דין ונוטריון עם הפרט....

22/08/2018

A reciprocal will is a type of will made by 2 people in favor of each other or mutually agreed third parties. This type of will is typically made by a couple who want to leave all assets to the surviving spouse and after the death of the surviving spouse wish that the remaining assets pass to their joint children. At the root of the decision to sign a reciprocal will is a common desire that the property eventually pass to the couple's children coupled with a worry that the surviving spouse might remarry and write a will in favor of the new spouse or otherwise change the will.
When the surviving spouse wishes to cancel the will there is a conflict between two principles; the principle of reliance (each party to the will expects that the other will not change its provisions and relied on that when writing the reciprocal will) and the principle that everybody has freedom to bequeath his possessions as he sees fit.
As a rule the only way to cancel a reciprocal will is under section 8a (b) (2) (a) of the Inheritance Law, 5725-1965 which states that a spouse who cancels a mutual will has to waive any benefit that he is supposed to receive under the reciprocal will.
What happens in a case in which the surviving spouse didn't receive anything under the reciprocal will but didn't explicitly waive his rights?
This question recently came before the Jerusalem family court. The defendant claimed that the deceased (the surviving spouse under the reciprocal will) did not receive anything under the reciprocal will and therefore there were no rights to waive. The judge determined that the section does not require that the surviving spouse actually receive anything under the reciprocal will and that it is sufficient that he was the listed heir. Therefore, since the deceased did not fulfill the conditions stipulated in the law to cancel the reciprocal will, the mutual will was not annulled and is valid.
The judge decided that the principle of reliance is preferable to the freedom to bequeath because the principle of reliance is a later and specific principle, while the freedom to bequeath is an early and general principle and because the freedom to bequeath includes freedom to choose between making a reciprocal will and making a regular will. The choice to make a reciprocal will includes the willingness to accept the laws that apply to such a will, including the principle of reliance. In addition, the judge determined that the language of the will was such as to prevent either side from unilaterally cancelling after the death of the other side.

20/03/2018

Too often I have seen wills in which people bequeath monies held in an insurance policy or a training fund (keren hishtalmut) to their heirs. The proper legal way to do so is not through a will but rather by notifying the insurance company and registering those people as beneficiaries. Alternatively, one can send a copy of the will to the insurance company during the testator's lifetime, which also would be considered proper notification.
What happens if a testator doesn't send a copy of his will to the insurance company during his lifetime? Occasionally there is no problem because the registered beneficiaries are also the heirs under the will but that is not always the case.
A case came before the Tel Aviv labor court in which the plaintiff – the deceased's ex-wife – sued a fund claiming that she should receive the monies in the fund because she is the registered beneficiary of the policy. The deceased's heirs - including his son and current spouse - claimed that they should receive the money under the terms of the will.
The judge noted that there are contradictory judgments in the supreme court, some of which say that the will must be sent to the insurance company in the lifetime of the testator in order to be considered notification and some which say that it is enough to send the will afterwards.
In the specific circumstances of the case, including the considerable amount of time that passed from the date the deceased signed the application to join the fund until the signing of the will in 2014 and that the deceased was divorced during this time, the court concluded that the deceased's wish was not to bequeath the monies accumulated in the fund to the plaintiff but to his spouse on the date of his death and son.
Obviously if somebody wishes to change his beneficiaries it is better not to rely on a judgment, which could go either way, and one should properly notify the insurance company.