Lately the office won a proceeding where we represented a woman who was being petitioned in an attempt to reduce alimony. The subject was a procedure where an agreement was signed a few years ago, in a framework where joint custody and child alimony were settled. After three years approximately, the father (the counterparty) petitioned the reducing of alimony, basing his claim on the Supreme Court rule (Family Petition to Appeal 919/15), the joint custody and a decrease in his salary; in respect of all of these he claimed for reducing the alimony. At the trial, all the woman’s claims were approved, by means of no proof in any circumstantial change essentially warranting court intervention, our claim was approved that the court not only examines actual earnings, but also earning capacity and the court will generally not intervene, especially in a case where it was agreed on alimony based on a comprehensive divorce agreement (for the agreement might have included other concessions that influenced alimony agreement). It is to be noted that in the circumstances of the matter and beyond the letter of the law, the counterparty wasn’t required to pay court costs.
