A rabbinical advocate (“toen rabani”) is a person authorized to represent people in cases before rabbinical courts, similar to a lawyer in general litigation. Some specialize in family law — divorce, ketubah, alimony, and inheritance — while others specialize in monetary matters, asset disputes, and drafting agreements, among other areas.
A rabbinical advocate who represents clients in the state rabbinical courts for family-law matters must pass examinations and receive certification and a license from the Chief Rabbinate. By contrast, a rabbinical advocate representing clients in monetary matters before private batei din is not required to pass any examinations or hold any license in order to represent parties there. It is important to note, however, that holding a license does not guarantee that a person is truly knowledgeable and expert in the relevant halachic areas. It is therefore advisable to find a genuine expert who can protect your rights reliably and effectively, rather than being drawn in by grandiose promises from those without real experience or training.
There are three types of batei din (rabbinical courts).
The first type is the regional state rabbinical courts found in every district, such as the Jerusalem Regional Rabbinical Court. These are operated by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and are authorized by the state legal system. In the eyes of the law, these batei din are defined as courts, and they have jurisdiction over family law, inheritance, and hekdesh (religious trust) matters. Their authority in these areas runs parallel to that of the general court system, which is likewise authorized to hear these matters — except for divorce and ketubah claims and the actual arranging of a get, which must go through the rabbinical court; the civil court has no authority over these, even if both parties agree to it. As a result, two judicial systems operate in parallel in Israel, and whichever system a case is first filed in generally retains jurisdiction over everything connected to that claim going forward. This creates what is known as the “race to the courthouse,” where each side rushes to file in the forum of their choice, thereby dragging the other side into litigating there as well, against their will.
There is an important distinction within the areas of jurisdiction granted to the rabbinical court: its authority to hear family-law matters does not depend on the parties’ consent, so if someone is sued in the rabbinical court over a divorce-related matter, they are legally required to appear there and have no right to insist on a different forum, such as the civil court. This is not the case for inheritance matters — there, the rabbinical court only has jurisdiction if all the heirs/beneficiaries of the estate accept its authority. Otherwise, one party cannot be forced to litigate before the rabbinical court, unlike the civil court, where a hearing on inheritance matters can be initiated and all beneficiaries are required to participate, even against their will.
At one time, the rabbinical court also had authority to rule on monetary matters, but following the 2006 ruling of Israel’s Supreme Court (HCJ 8638/03, Sima Amir v. the Great Rabbinical Court), it was stripped of jurisdiction over monetary claims, even with the consent of both parties.
The second type of batei din are the so-called private battei din. These are private bodies, generally run by communities or various religious organizations, that provide adjudicative services to those who come before them. These battei din rule according to Jewish law (halacha), as set out in the Shulchan Aruch and its commentaries, while taking civil law into account in certain respects. Their primary authority derives from Torah law, which empowers expert dayanim to adjudicate monetary disputes and to obligate or exempt a party according to the rules established in halacha. Today, before such a beit din begins hearing a case, the parties customarily accept its authority through a kinyan (a formal act, such as lifting an item of value), which obligates them under halacha to comply with the beit din’s rulings. Someone who disregards the beit din is considered to have transgressed and may face social repercussions within the Haredi/religious community. Although the law does not recognize the concept of kinyan in this context, a private beit din’s jurisdiction can still be established in a manner that is legally binding, under the Arbitration Law (1968), which provides that parties to a dispute may appoint an arbitrator to decide the matter between them. The agreed arbitrator may be a single arbitrator or any other number of decision-makers. Under this law, once parties have signed an arbitration agreement for a particular beit din, they are deemed to have accepted its authority to adjudicate between them, and are legally bound to act according to the arbitrator’s ruling they signed onto. If a party fails to comply with the arbitrator’s ruling, they may be held in contempt of court and penalized under the law with fines and the like, just as if they had failed to comply with a court ruling. (To this end, the arbitrator’s ruling must be confirmed by the relevant district court — a simple procedural step that can be done independently or with the help of a lawyer.)
The third type of beit din is the private battei din that also rule on family-law matters. There are a small number of battei din (the Eda Chareidis Beit Din in Jerusalem, and the Bnei Brak Beit Din founded by Rabbi Nissim Karelitz zt”l) that also deal with family law, and which have an arrangement with the Chief Rabbinate permitting them to rule on family-law matters by consent, and even to arrange a get. Their authority in these matters is limited, and it should be verified whether they will hear the specific matter you wish to bring before them.
Israel has a unique legal reality: two parallel court systems — the rabbinical court for family matters and the civil family court — both of which have jurisdiction to hear family-law cases.
The jurisdiction of each is not identical, but very close. For example, arranging a get and ketubah claims can only be handled by the rabbinical court, since actually carrying out a get, as well as anything relating to a ketubah, are inherently religious matters that only authorized religious authorities may handle — as our sages state in Tractate Gittin, that anyone who does not know the intricacies of divorce and marriage documents should have nothing to do with them.
The other claims connected to divorce — such as property claims, spousal support and residence, child support and residence, and child custody — may be brought before either forum, and this is where the “race to the courthouse” begins. Even though these claims can be filed in either forum, once one party has filed in a particular forum, the other party is locked into that forum and cannot transfer the case to the other forum without the consent of the party who filed it, who would need to withdraw it and refile in the parallel forum. This sometimes creates a situation where one party files certain claims before the rabbinical court and other claims relating to the same family dispute before the civil court, which significantly complicates representation and case management.
The race to the courthouse begins the moment one party opens a file with the Dispute Resolution Unit, which is the mandatory first step for anyone wishing to begin divorce proceedings. A file can be opened either with the unit attached to the rabbinical court or with the parallel unit attached to the civil court. After opening a file with the dispute-resolution unit, the parties must wait two months before either one may open a case in the rabbinical court or the civil court — this is meant to give the unit’s staff a full opportunity to help the parties reach an agreement (something that, in practice, usually does not succeed). At the end of those two months, the party who opened the file with the dispute-resolution unit has an additional 15 days during which only they may open cases and sue in whichever forum they see fit. On the 16th day after the waiting period ends, the other party is also permitted to file. During that window, whoever files first wins the “race to the courthouse,” and it is that party who determines whether the couple’s cases will be heard in the rabbinical court or the civil court.
An appeal must be filed within 30 days of receiving the judgment. In special cases, the Rabbinical High Court (Beit Din Hagadol) may extend the deadline for filing an appeal when extenuating circumstances apply. As an extension is not guaranteed, it’s better to file early and update your appeal later if necessary.
Yes, it is often recommended, and in second marriages it is considered standard practice. Although the law states that assets owned prior to the marriage remain with the original owner, a Supreme Court ruling allows for some assets to be divided equally in the event of a divorce, even if they were owned by only one party before marriage. Therefore, when substantial assets are involved, such as an apartment, a prenuptial agreement is advisable.
In Jewish law, unlike civil law, the principle of “finality of proceedings,” does not arbitrarily or automatically close the case. This means that a case can be reopened at any time if new evidence that was unknown to the litigant during the original proceedings comes to light.
However, the Beit Din may request a deposit to ensure that the appeal is being made in good faith, and not just as a stalling tactic.
Typically, the rabbinical court hears cases before three judges, with the exception of technical rulings or temporary ordinances that do not determine the outcome of the case. These can include asset freezing, travel restriction orders, cease and desist, and restraining orders, where a single judge may preside.
Additionally, if both sides accept the authority of a single Judge, monetary issues can also be decided without a full Beit Din of three Dayanin.
Both the rabbinical court and civil court have concurrent jurisdiction over spousal alimony.
Generally, the case will proceed in the court where it was originally filed, unless a specific judicial body was specified in a written agreement between the sides.
If both parties agree to the divorce, and are willing to sign a divorce settlement, the process is quick. However, in cases where there are disputes between the parties, the timeline varies from case to case, and there is no set timeframe for completion. Without the proper guidance in navigating the bureaucracy, it can take months or even years before everything is wrapped up.
Yes, you can file a claim without a Toen Rabani, but it may lead to unwanted and unfortunate outcomes. Because of the emotional involvement, self-representation is often highly stressful, and ineffective. Working with a competent Toen Rabani will save you money and heartache, and will speed up the process, enabling you to get back to rebuilding your life sooner, and from a place of strenght.
Our Sages (Talmud Bavli, Ketubot 82b) instituted the ketubah for a wife in order to establish the framework of obligations between spouses — including the husband’s duty to provide for his wife’s sustenance and medical care (and even her burial, God forbid) — but above all, to protect her and make divorce more difficult, so as to prevent unnecessary divorces and help her rebuild her life after a divorce or widowhood. To this end, they set a non-trivial sum: 200 zuz, plus an additional 200 zekukim of pure silver as a tosefet ketubah (supplementary ketubah amount) — a sum that, in today’s currency, comes to over 10,000 NIS (this is according to Ashkenazi custom, which sets a fixed amount; among Sephardim, the sky is the limit, as it is common to add tens or even hundreds of thousands to the base sum). In the event of divorce, the husband is obligated to pay this sum to his wife — giving him real reason to think twice before deciding to divorce her.
There are many additional halachic details regarding the ketubah, not all of which appear in the text of the ketubah document itself — they are found in Tractate Ketubot and in the Shulchan Aruch, but this is the foundation. To this day, it remains a powerful tool for slowing the runaway train toward divorce, since the husband knows he will owe a substantial sum if the marriage ends.
Today, even though Israel’s property relations law already entitles a wife to half of the couple’s joint assets, the ketubah still plays a real role in every divorce case — serving as an important bargaining chip in the wife’s hands: to waive it and let the get (Jewish divorce) proceed, sometimes in exchange for significant concessions from the other side, or to insist on payment and extend the divorce process until her right to the ketubah is resolved.
This is because a wife is not automatically entitled to ketubah payment in every case — there are circumstances in which she may forfeit that right through actions that cause the breakdown of the marriage. The general rule is that the spouse who leaves the home, or whose intolerable behavior causes the other spouse to leave, risks losing in a ketubah claim. In other words, if the beit din rules that the breakdown of the marriage was caused by the husband, he will have to pay the ketubah in full. Conversely, if the wife is found to be at fault, she stands to lose her right to receive ketubah payment.
By Rabbi Nosson Ehrlich, Dayan at the “Nachalei HaMishpat” Beit Din, Jerusalem, and the “Choshen Mishpat” Beit Din, Elad