-
A CWJ district court victory forced a magistrate’s court to carry out its mandate of upholding democracy. CWJ client Ruth Colian heads U’Bezchutan, Israel’s first Haredi women’s political party. Colian sued two Haredi dailies in magistrate’s court for discrimination when they suppressed the party’s campaigns in the 2015 Knesset elections. Unwilling to tangle with the rabbinate, the magistrates’ court dismissed Colian’s suit. CWJ appealed the decision in Lod District Court, which – in a show of determination to uphold democratic protocols over rabbinic intimidation – rejected the magistrates’ court decision.
-
In response to a CWJ tort case, a woman who was denied a Get for 11 years was awarded damages in the amount of a quarter of a million dollars. In an important new precedent, the Court imposed the payment not only on the husband, but also on a friend who assisted him. This is the first time that an individual, other than a relative of one of the parties, has been found to be an accomplice to the tort and forced to pay damages. In addition, this is also the first time that the Court held that the damage to the wife began on the day the husband left the house and not from the day the court ordered the husband must grant his wife a divorce.
A CWJ district court victory forced a magistrate’s court to carry out its mandate of upholding democracy. CWJ client Ruth Colian heads U’Bezchutan, Israel’s first Haredi women’s political party. Colian sued two Haredi dailies in magistrate’s court for discrimination when they suppressed the party’s campaigns in the 2015 Knesset elections. Unwilling to tangle with the rabbinate, the magistrates’ court dismissed Colian’s suit. CWJ appealed the decision in Lod District Court, which – in a show of determination to uphold democratic protocols over rabbinic intimidation – rejected the magistrates’ court decision.
In response to a CWJ tort case, a woman who was denied a Get for 11 years was awarded damages in the amount of a quarter of a million dollars. In an important new precedent, the Court imposed the payment not only on the husband, but also on a friend who assisted him. This is the first time that an individual, other than a relative of one of the parties, has been found to be an accomplice to the tort and forced to pay damages. In addition, this is also the first time that the Court held that the damage to the wife began on the day the husband left the house and not from the day the court ordered the husband must grant his wife a divorce.