Can a court change a will after someone has died? In an unusual recent case, an Israeli Family Law Court decided that it could correct a later will after finding that one of its provisions did not reflect the deceased’s actual wishes
The case involved a 93-year-old man who died in 2023. He was widowed and had no children. During his lifetime, he made two wills, one in 2002 and another in 2020. The two wills appeared to conflict. The earlier will left a house in Ness Ziona to the deceased’s nephew. The second will divided other assets between five beneficiaries and included a clause stating that it cancelled all previous wills.
The problem was that the later will did not specifically mention the Ness Ziona house. The nephew argued that his uncle had never intended to cancel the earlier gift of the house. The court ultimately agreed and ordered the relevant wording to be removed from the later will. As a result, both wills remained valid and operated alongside each other.
What happened to the two wills?
The deceased owned an apartment in Tel Aviv and a house in Ness Ziona. In his 2002 will, he left his rights in the Ness Ziona property to his nephew. Many years later, in December 2020, he made another will. This will divided his property between five beneficiaries in equal shares. It specifically referred to the Tel Aviv apartment, money and financial rights.
There was no specific reference to the Ness Ziona house.
However, the 2020 will contained a provision stating that it was the deceased’s final will and that it cancelled every previous will. That wording created the dispute. If the clause remained in the will, the 2002 will would effectively be cancelled. This could mean that the nephew would lose the inheritance he had been promised under the earlier will. The nephew therefore asked the court to correct the later will.
Why did the nephew say there was a mistake?
The nephew argued that his uncle had not intended to take the Ness Ziona property away from him. He claimed that the purpose of the 2020 will was to deal with the deceased’s other assets, particularly the Tel Aviv apartment. The other parties disagreed. They argued that there had been no mistake and that the deceased had deliberately decided to cancel the earlier will. They also argued that the deceased had wanted to change the inheritance arrangements because of the nephew’s alleged behaviour towards him. The court therefore had to decide a difficult question, Did the wording of the 2020 will actually reflect what the deceased wanted?
What did the court consider?
The court looked at the relationship between the deceased and his nephew, as well as the circumstances surrounding the two wills. The judge found that the relationship between the two remained close. The court described their relationship as being similar to that of a father and son. The deceased had also relied on his nephew to help him with various matters. Among other things, the nephew assisted him with matters relating to a project involving the Tel Aviv property. The court also considered evidence that the deceased had discussed the Tel Aviv apartment when talking about his later will, without mentioning the Ness Ziona house. The court found it difficult to accept that the deceased had suddenly intended to remove the nephew from the Ness Ziona property while continuing to have a close relationship with him.
A standard clause that did not reflect the deceased’s wishes
One of the most important aspects of the case was the wording cancelling the earlier will. The judge concluded that the provision stating that the 2020 will was the deceased’s last will and cancelled all previous wills had been included as part of the standard format used when preparing wills. In other words, the court found that the clause had effectively been inserted as a default provision and did not reflect what the deceased actually intended in this particular case. The judge was persuaded that the deceased wanted the five beneficiaries named in the 2020 will to receive the Tel Aviv apartment and his other property, while the nephew would continue to receive the Ness Ziona house under the 2002 will. The court therefore ordered that the cancellation provision be removed from the 2020 will.
Can a court correct a will after death?
Israeli inheritance law allows a court, in certain circumstances, to deal with a mistake in a will. However, this does not mean that a court can simply rewrite a will because family members disagree about what would be fair. The central question before the Judge is one of correct interpretation: what did the person who made the will actually intend?
This case is unusual because the court found sufficient evidence to conclude that the deceased’s actual intention was different from what the wording of the later will appeared to say. The correction therefore did not create a completely new inheritance arrangement. Instead, it allowed the court to give effect to the deceased’s apparent intention by removing the provision that was found to be erroneous.
The result: both wills remained in effect
The court accepted the nephew’s request. The words cancelling the previous will were removed from the 2020 will. This meant that the two wills could operate together. The nephew would receive the Ness Ziona house under the 2002 will, while the Tel Aviv apartment and the other property covered by the 2020 will would be divided between the five beneficiaries named in that will. The parties who opposed the nephew’s request were also ordered to pay him NIS 60,000 in legal costs.
Why is this case important?
The case is a useful reminder that preparing a new will does not necessarily mean that every part of an earlier will should be cancelled. Someone who already has a will and wants to make changes should make sure that the new document clearly explains what is being changed. This is particularly important where a person owns several properties or wants different beneficiaries to receive different assets. A standard clause stating that a new will cancels all previous wills can have significant consequences. If the person actually intends certain provisions of an earlier will to remain in effect, this should be made clear. The case also shows why the circumstances surrounding the preparation of a will can become important if a dispute later reaches court.
Making or updating a will in Israel
A will is intended to provide clear instructions about what should happen to a person’s estate after their death. Unclear wording can instead create disputes between family members and beneficiaries. If you are preparing a will in Israel, changing an existing will, or dealing with a dispute concerning the interpretation or validity of a will, it is important to obtain legal advice before taking action.
The Decker, Pex, Levi Law Firm operates branches in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, offering legal assistance across civil, inheritance, and family law matters alongside its primary immigration practice.Our law firm can help clients prepare, review, and update wills to ensure their wishes are clearly reflected and to avoid potential disputes. Our articles on drawing up a will, and contesting wills, could also be helpful guides for you to consider. We also represent beneficiaries in inheritance disputes, including cases involving questions about a will’s validity, interpretation, or correction. Contact us to discuss your circumstances and learn how Israeli inheritance law may apply to your situation.