Israeli Tycoon’s ‘One Shekel’ Will Clause Upheld, Widow Receives $1.6 Million
A Tel Aviv court has ruled in favor of the children from a previous marriage of a prominent Israeli businessman, enforcing a “no-contest” clause in his will that significantly reduces the inheritance for his widow. While the widow forfeited substantial assets, she will still receive approximately 5.9 million shekels (roughly $1.6 million) as a result of a separate ruling regarding property rights.
The ‘One Shekel’ Clause
The businessman, whose identity remains undisclosed, included a clause in his will stipulating that any heir who challenged its terms would receive only one shekel. This measure was intended to prevent legal battles over his estate, which included shares in a company controlling significant Israeli properties. Despite the clause, the widow initiated legal proceedings, triggering the enforcement of the will’s provision.
Property Claim and Court Ruling
After initially upholding the will, the widow filed a separate property claim against the children, seeking half of the assets accumulated during her and the businessman’s common-law partnership prior to their marriage, as well as half of the increase in value of those assets. She argued her active involvement in managing the businesses contributed to their growth.
In April 2025, a family court initially ruled in favor of the children on the no-contest clause, but likewise upheld the widow’s separate property claim, awarding her one-third of the shares in one of the businessman’s companies. Both sides appealed this decision.
Judge Naftali Shilo of the Tel Aviv District Court ultimately rejected the widow’s appeal, determining that filing the property claim constituted a challenge to the will and triggered the no-contest clause. The judge stated that the widow’s claim sought to transfer property intended for the children to herself, directly contradicting the businessman’s intent.
Partial Victory for the Widow
However, the court also ruled that the widow’s breach of undertaking did not negate her right to claim property rights related to the increase in value of assets under the legal presumption of joint ownership. She is entitled to half of the appreciation of certain assets, amounting to approximately 5.9 million shekels.
Legal Representation and Reactions
The children were represented by attorneys Boaz Kraus, Hamutal Tsari-Semina, and Yossi Ashkenazi. The widow was represented by attorney Avner Zinger.
Kraus and Tsari-Semina stated that the ruling “sends a sharp and clear message — a person’s will is not a recommendation but an instruction that must be respected.”
Zinger noted that the dissenting opinion was “well reasoned” and reflected the deceased’s intent, describing the couple’s relationship as loving and close. He indicated they are considering an appeal to Israel’s Supreme Court.