The innovations of modern technology in the generation of Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram keep the rabbinical courts busy.
Members of the Jerusalem Regional Rabbinical Court - Rabbi Yosef Goldberg, Rabbi David Bardugo and Rabbi Mordechai Ralbag - were asked by an ultra-Orthodox husband to release him from paying the ketubah fee because his wife "talks to the guys on Facebook.".
The story: An ultra-Orthodox couple from north Jerusalem divorced about four months ago by mutual consent, leaving the financial issues to be resolved after the divorce.
Want more news, videos and stories? Join the Haredim 10 WhatsApp channel >>
The woman sued her husband through the Rabbinical Court for 55,555 NIS in ketubah fees. The man, on the other hand, claimed that his ex-wife was not entitled to ketubah fees because she corresponded with men on Facebook in the dead of night and avoided having sex.
As evidence, he brought out Facebook and Messenger chat logs that showed that after midnight she had called two guys at the same time. The husband also claimed that his wife had removed embarrassing photos from her Facebook page.
The husband's attorney based the refusal to pay the ketubah fee on dozens of halachic sources and legal precedents, according to which in these circumstances the wife is not entitled to the ketubah fee.
The woman, for her part, denied the allegations that she had avoided having a family life, and even presented evidence to that effect. The woman confirmed that she had used Facebook but said that it was only for the purpose of "searching," with the aim of getting her husband to return to her.
Members of the regional rabbinical court discussed the issue at length and came to the conclusion: "Since no response from a partner was presented on Facebook, this strengthens the woman's claim that she only did a search to make her husband jealous. And although it is not appropriate to act in this way according to the rules of modesty, especially in an observant family, in any case there is no ugliness here.".
The court also relied on a witness brought by the husband himself, who told the court that he saw "great love" between them and confirmed in response to a question that the wife wanted peace at home.
Therefore, the court ruled that "the defendant must pay the plaintiff NIS 55,555 as her address fees. The parties will endeavor to reach agreements regarding the distribution of payments, and in the absence of agreements, the parties will submit their positions and the court will determine the distribution of payments.".
