## Facts

- The petitioner (wife) and her husband were Jewish Israeli citizens who married in Cyprus in a civil, non-Jewish ceremony rather than through a religious ceremony in Israel.
- After the relationship deteriorated, the husband initiated proceedings in the Tel Aviv-Jaffa Regional Rabbinical Court seeking dissolution of the marriage.
- The Regional Rabbinical Court issued a divorce decree dissolving the marriage without the wife’s consent.
- The wife argued that, under Jewish divorce norms, divorce generally requires consent and that the rabbinical court could not dissolve a civil marriage (or at least could not do so unilaterally).
- The dispute reached the rabbinical court system, including the Great Rabbinical Court, whose reasoning the Supreme Court later relied upon regarding the status of civil marriages of Jews contracted abroad.
- The wife petitioned the Supreme Court of Israel sitting as the High Court of Justice to invalidate the rabbinical court decree dissolving the marriage.

## Issues

1. Whether Israeli rabbinical courts have exclusive jurisdiction to dissolve a civil marriage contracted abroad between two Jewish Israeli citizens.
2. If rabbinical courts have jurisdiction, whether they may dissolve such a marriage on the basis that the relationship has ended (irretrievable breakdown), without requiring traditional Jewish-law divorce grounds.
3. Whether the lack of the wife’s consent invalidates the rabbinical court’s decree dissolving the overseas civil marriage.

## Decision

- The High Court denied the petition and left the rabbinical court’s divorce decree in force.
- The Court held that rabbinical courts in Israel have sole jurisdiction to issue a divorce decree dissolving a civil marriage between Jews that was contracted abroad.
- The Court accepted that such civil marriages, although not a classic religious marriage under Jewish law, have legal effect that prevents remarriage until formally dissolved.
- The Court held that dissolution of this type of civil marriage need not rest on one of the usual Jewish-law grounds for divorce; the proper basis is that the marriage has ended, i.e., it has broken down irretrievably.
- The Court held that the divorce decree dissolving such a marriage does not require the consent of both parties and does not require proof of fault.

## Legal Principles

- Under Israel’s personal-status regime and the Rabbinical Courts Jurisdiction (Marriage and Divorce) Law, matters of marriage and divorce of Jews are placed in the exclusive jurisdiction of the rabbinical courts; this includes dissolution of civil marriages of Jews contracted abroad.
- A civil marriage of two Jews performed outside Israel may be treated as having recognized legal effect (“external validity”) that blocks remarriage until the marital status is terminated by a competent tribunal.
- Because the proceeding concerns termination of a civil-status marriage (not a classic religious marriage performed through Jewish law), the rabbinical court’s decree dissolving it need not follow the ordinary Jewish-law divorce framework of specified grounds and mutual consent.
- The appropriate substantive standard for dissolving such an overseas civil marriage is that the marital relationship has ended—irretrievable breakdown—without a requirement to show fault.
- A party’s refusal to consent does not, by itself, bar dissolution of an overseas civil marriage of Jews when the competent rabbinical court finds the marriage has ended.

## Conclusion

Anonymous v. Tel Aviv-Jaffa Regional Rabbinical Court confirms that Israeli rabbinical courts have exclusive authority to dissolve civil marriages between Jews contracted abroad and may do so upon a finding that the marriage has irretrievably broken down, without requiring traditional Jewish-law divorce grounds, proof of fault, or the consent of both spouses.


Anonymous v. Tel Aviv-Jaffa Regional Rabbinical Court, HCJ 2232/03, 61(3) PD 496 (2006)