Michael Gabor Law Office & Notary

Michael Gabor, Law Offices, Mediation & Notary is a leading law firm practicing family and inheritance law, as well as matters arising from the insolvency of the family unit during its dissolution. The firm also handles insolvency proceedings in their various aspects, with Adv. Michael Gabor serving as a trustee in insolvency proceedings on behalf of the Insolvency and Economic Rehabilitation Commissioner in the Haifa District.
The firm provides comprehensive representation in divorce and family law matters, including proceedings before the Rabbinical Courts, ketubah claims, child support, parenting arrangements, property division and dissolution of co-ownership, pension rights, options and shares, parental responsibility and parental alienation disputes, common-law spouse matters, domestic violence and protection orders, family tort claims, third-age divorces, mediation, arbitration, and family agreements. The firm also serves as a court-appointed guardian, receiver, estate administrator, and officer of the court in family matters.
In addition, the firm advises creditors, including maintenance recipients, in insolvency proceedings, handles maintenance enforcement and collection proceedings, including cross-border matters and enforcement of foreign judgments, and offers expertise in matters involving the intersection of family law and insolvency law. The firm also prepares lasting powers of attorney and alternatives to traditional guardianship arrangements.

The Interface Between Insolvency and Family Law

The firm has developed unique expertise at the intersection of family law and insolvency proceedings. Adv. Gabor regularly handles matters involving asset division, maintenance obligations, creditor rights, and the impact of insolvency on family disputes, providing clients with a comprehensive perspective on the legal and financial implications of family breakdown.

Reliability, Professionalism, Availability and Accessibility

Adv. Michael Gabor’s practice is founded on reliability, professionalism, accessibility, and client service. His extensive experience and expertise have led to significant legal achievements and precedents, with the firm’s work frequently cited in legal publications, professional articles, and court decisions, particularly in matters concerning the intersection of family law and insolvency law.

Family Appeal 3984/15: A Landmark Child Support Precedent

One of the firm’s most notable achievements is the Supreme Court precedent established in Family Appeal 3984/15, which recognized a minor’s independent right to pursue child support claims. The ruling confirmed that children are not bound by agreements between their parents that compromise their entitlement to maintenance and remains a leading authority in Israeli family law.

Selected Cases

A child support claim against a father whose paternity was not established at the time of birth: A man and a woman conceived a child and signed an agreement in which the mother stated that she is only interested that the father would be involved in the child’s life and she would not sue him for child support, especially in light of the fact that he is a foreign residents. The family court rejected this and ruled that the child would be entitled to child support payments since the minor’s benefit prevails over the parents’ interests.
The father appealed this ruling and the district court determined that in light of the father’s reliance on the agreement with the mother and his compliance through maintaining a relationship with the minor, he shall not be liable to pay child support. In an appeal that the firm filed in the Supreme Court on behalf of the mother, the binding legal rule was set, that a minor would not be bound by any agreement between the parents – and the Supreme Court emphasized the minor benefit principle which prevails over other interests. This is a binding rule of the Supreme Court.

Appeal on “Parental Alienation” or legitimate estrangement: The firm successfully appealed a Family Court decision that denied a mother’s request for sole guardianship based on allegations of parental alienation. In its decision, the District Court distinguished between genuine parental alienation and situations in which children legitimately refuse contact with a parent based on their own experiences. The judgment provided important judicial guidance regarding the examination of parental alienation claims and is regarded as an important contribution to the development of this evolving area of family law.

Educational Placement Dispute: The firm represented a mother in a dispute concerning the educational placement of her child. The father opposed the child’s enrolment in a particular educational framework and sought placement in an alternative institution closer to his residence.

The firm demonstrated that continuation within the selected educational framework best served the child’s interests and educational stability. The Rabbinical Court accepted the firm’s position and approved the child’s continued enrolment shortly before the start of the school year.

International Property Division Matter: The firm represented a wife in complex property proceedings involving an apartment purchased abroad during the marriage using funds provided by the husband and registered in the wife’s name. Following the sale of the property, the husband argued that registration had been made solely for convenience and sought recovery of the sale proceeds. The firm successfully established that the apartment had been gifted to the wife. The Rabbinical Court ruled that both the proceeds of the property and the associated vehicle belonged exclusively to her, notwithstanding claims that the assets should be divided between the parties.

Divorce Agreement Appeal: The firm successfully represented a wife in appellate proceedings concerning the legal status of a divorce agreement that had never received judicial approval.

The husband argued that the agreement should nevertheless be recognized as binding because the parties had acted in accordance with its provisions. The firm maintained that a divorce agreement requires judicial approval to acquire legal validity and that the agreement itself contemplated further completion and approval. The Great Rabbinical Court accepted the firm’s position and dismissed the appeal, reinforcing the principle that such agreements cannot become binding in the absence of the required judicial approval.

Asset Protection and Protection of an Elderly Parent: Representing the children of an 85-year-old man, the firm sought urgent relief to protect assets that were allegedly at risk due to concerns regarding exploitation of the father’s cognitive condition. The matter involved a complex corporate structure spanning multiple jurisdictions and raised concerns regarding the potential transfer or depletion of assets before the underlying proceedings could be resolved. Following an urgent application, the District Court accepted the firm’s position and issued an ex parte injunction preventing any action relating to the assets and companies concerned.