Lawyer & Founder
Varda Haklai Law Firm
View ProfileVarda Haklai
About Varda Haklai Law Firm
Varda Haklai Law Firm is a boutique firm with proven reputation, specializing in family and inheritance laws. For over 30 years, the firm made significant achievements and contributed to changing the legal situation in family and inheritance laws. The firm’s clients include key players in the Israeli economy and their partners, senior executives and well-known figures in the fields of medicine, defense forces, finance, business, etc. These clients benefit from Adv. Haklai’s expertise, her many years of experience and her understanding of the legal system, that together with her knowledge of tangential areas (such as civil and commercial laws) and her direct involvement in each case, result in optimal legal outcomes. Adv. Haklai is a well-known and experienced lawyer in the field of family law, respected by clients, judges and rabbinical court dayanim. Throughout the years, Adv. Haklai acquired skills and knowledge in tangential legal spheres such as corporate law, real-estate law and more, expertise that are frequently required in many divorce disputes. Thanks to these understandings, Adv. Haklai is able to leverage her clients’ rights in divorce proceedings, or when resolving disputes in inheritance and estate cases. Adv. Haklai is also highly experienced in many areas of conflict management, including disputes over the division of career assets acquired during a marriage; disagreements involving the manner of assessing the value of companies or company shares; exercising shares owned by one partner; assessing and dividing the ‘earning capacity’ or ‘reputation’ of one partner when calculating entitlement to child support, rehabilitation or adjustment grant for the partner in an inferior economic situation, and more.
Adv. Varda Haklai
Adv. Haklai is a certified lawyer (85) and mediator (00). In addition to litigation in legal disputes, Adv. Haklai also conducts mediation proceedings in conflict resolution and in drafting prenuptial and divorce agreements. During her years of professional practice, Adv. Haklai trained many lawyers in family law, among them are lawyers who have since been appointed judges and are currently serving in the courts. The law firm includes a professional, skilled and experienced team of lawyers, assisting her in providing clients with professional, effective and purposeful legal consult.
Adv. Haklai demonstrates uncompromising determination in protecting her clients’ rights. This determination led to significant triumphs in the legal sphere. Over the years, Adv. Haklai managed to set many precedents:
The Barel ruling (LCA 4358/01 Barel v Barel in the Supreme Court) – This verdict was a direct result of Adv. Haklai’s persistence on her client’s right to oppose her husband’s demands to selling their family home with no connection to applying an overall equitable division of property, including all their other joint property. The ruling paved the way for the practice of whereby dismantling the partnership in the home is part of the equitable division of property, so as to enable an overall view of all the joint property and allow the ‘weak party’ to exercise all their rights to the property. This 2001 ruling is still the basis of many court rulings today.
Jerusalem Family Court Ruling – In which the court ordered to cancel a part of the divorce agreement signed by the couple, after it was proven that the husband concealed information from his wife about the existence of a Swiss bank account in his name, containing hundreds of thousands of dollars, despite an explicit clause in the divorce agreement in which each of the parties allegedly waived all rights managed by the other party’s name, known or unknown (AC 18418-08-10 of September 1, 2013).
Ruling by the Ramat Gan Family Court – The court rejected a lawsuit by a woman against her divorced husband, 15 years after the divorce, in which she petitioned for recognition of her rights to half of the shares given to her ex-husband a year after they divorced. The court rejected her claim that the shares were given to her ex-husband thanks to his many devoted years of work for the company, during their marriage. The court accepted Adv. Haklai’s argument that the shares were un-known at the time of the divorce, and were given to him after the divorce was finalized, as an incentive to keep working for the company in the future. The court ruled that a partner’s rights to the other’s career assets must have been clearly acquired during the marriage. The court completely accepted Adv. Haklai’s argument that the shares in this case were given to her client in respect of events that occurred after the divorce, and therefore the ex-wife had no rights to half of them (AC 51791/04 of August 17, 2009).
Ruling given by the Haifa Court – In which a former partner attempted to exploit the statutory registration of rights in an apartment that was jointly registered in both partners’ names (50%-50%), by accident. After a long and complex legal trial, the court ruled that, as claimed by Adv. Haklai, the real rights of the parties were 75%-25%, and that the former partner’s attempts to claim otherwise verged on exploitation of the proper legal proceedings in bad faith (AC 41007-07-10 of May 19, 2013).
Ruling by the Tel Aviv District Family Court - Which was a precedent-setting at the time, in which the court cancelled the father’s liability to child support for his 14 year-old son, after many years of attempts made by the father and the welfare authorities to initiate a relationship between him and his son. The proceedings were conducted with maximum sensitivity to the father’s painful situation, who expressed his wishes for a normal relationship with his son. In the ruling, the court blamed the mother for her responsibility, and for coming between the father and his son. The court also ordered a reduction of child support for a fixed period, during which the mother and child could change their alienating behavior towards the father, ruling that if the lack of engagement remains the child support would stop completely, in an attempt to repair the parental connection (AC 50547-05-10 of January 11, 2012).
Ruling given by the Rabbinical High Court on January 6, 2016 – In which the Rabbinical High Court upheld a district court ruling binding a husband to a NIS 360,000 marriage contract, despite all his claims against the wife, Adv. Haklai’s client, being mentally ill and having been thrown out of the house by her. The court accepted Adv. Haklai’s arguments and ruled that it was the husband that caused the split, and therefore owed the sum from the marriage contract (Case 1024191/1).