Israel's High Court of Justice (Bagatz) summarily dismissed a petition by a father who took his 15-year-old son abroad with the permission of a rabbinical court and did not bring him back by the set date, leaving in place a fine of NIS 500 for every day. For any parent who fears parental child abduction from Israel, the message is twofold: consent to a trip should be anchored in a decision or an agreement, with a return date and security, and when the date passes, act at once, before the tribunal that granted the permission and through the Hague Convention track.
Itamar Levin reported the ruling in Bizportal on November 11, 2026. Justice Ruth Ronen wrote the judgment, and Justices Yael Willner and Alex Stein joined her. Family matters are heard behind closed doors, so here too the parties are described only by their roles.
What happened in the case
According to the report, the couple married in 2011 and have two children, now 15 and 9. Divorce proceedings began in 2021. In the proceedings over the custody of the children, the regional rabbinical court permitted the father to travel abroad with the older son on two conditions: that he return him by September 1, 2026, and that he deposit NIS 50,000.
The date passed, the father and son remained outside Israel, and the father announced that he did not intend to return the son. On September 9, 2026, the regional rabbinical court fined him NIS 500 for every day for contempt. The Great Rabbinical Court refused to hear the father's requests on their merits, on the ground that he had taken the law into his own hands and did not come with clean hands. The father petitioned the High Court of Justice against the decisions.
What the High Court held
The High Court of Justice is not an appellate court over the rabbinical courts. It intervenes in their decisions only in exceptional cases of excess of jurisdiction or a breach of the rules of natural justice, and Justice Ronen wrote that “we did not find that the case before us is one of those exceptional cases.”
The heart of the ruling is the clean hands doctrine. A person who turns to a judicial tribunal must respect its decisions, and the more serious the person's conduct, the stronger the tendency to dismiss his claims without examining their merits, as has been done with get refusers (husbands who refuse to grant a Jewish divorce). The court viewed the father's actions as self-help of the gravest kind, severely harming the mother, the children and the rule of law. It added that a later request by the father on resource balancing (izun mashabim) was decided on its merits, so the harm to his procedural rights is limited.
Before agreeing to a trip: a travel ban order for a minor
The first lesson concerns the stage before the trip. A parent who fears that the child will not be returned can ask the Family Court for a travel ban order for a minor (tzav ikuv yetzia min haaretz). According to Kol Zchut, such a request is open to a parent whose guardianship of the child has not been limited or revoked, and as a rule no special grounds need to be shown. Lifting the order, for one trip or permanently, requires the consent of both parents. Without consent the court decides, and permission to travel usually involves financial guarantees from the parent who wants to travel.
Kol Zchut lists factors the court considers: the child's age, the child's relationship with the parent who stays in Israel, signs of an intention to emigrate, past trips and returns, and whether the destination country has joined the Hague Convention. The permission in this case, with a return date and a deposit, is a mechanism of this kind, and it also shows its limits: a deposit deters, but it does not bring a child back. Anyone in a dispute over custody and parenting time who is asked to agree to a trip should find out in advance where the child is going, for how long, and what will happen on the day after the deadline.
Parental child abduction from Israel and the Hague Convention
When the child is already abroad and has not been returned, time is the decisive factor. The Hague Convention (Return of Abducted Children) Law, 5751-1991, gave the Convention the force of law in Israel. Under Article 3 of the Convention, abduction is not only the wrongful removal of a child but also the child's retention in another country in breach of custody rights under the law of the country where the child habitually resided, where those rights were actually exercised. An agreed trip that did not end with a return may therefore fall within the definition.
Under Article 12 of the Convention, when proceedings begin within one year of the wrongful removal or retention, the authority in the country where the child is shall order the child's return forthwith. Even after one year, return is ordered unless it is shown that the child has settled in the new environment. Article 13 sets out exceptions, including consent or later acquiescence by the parent left behind, a grave risk to the child, and the objection of a child who has reached an age and degree of maturity at which it is appropriate to take the child's views into account. Under Article 4, the Convention ceases to apply when the child turns 16, so with teenagers every week counts.
In Israel, under section 4 of the Law, the Attorney General is the Central Authority for carrying out the Convention. When a child has been wrongfully brought to Israel, under section 6 the claim is heard by the District Court. The Convention applies only between countries that have joined it, so the identity of the country to which the child was taken determines the entire track.
What to do when the return date has passed
Act without waiting: keep the decision or agreement that set the return date, turn to the tribunal that granted the permission, and check immediately whether the country where the child is located is a party to the Hague Convention. According to Kol Zchut, an urgent request to secure contact between a parent and a child can be filed at any time, including during a dispute settlement (yishuv sichsuch) proceeding, and in an exceptional case where waiting would cause harm, the Family Court will hear it within 14 days. Anyone in the middle of such a proceeding can check the relevant deadlines in the dispute settlement deadline calculator.
The firm's family law department, managed by Adv. Kimberly Bell, can review your case, before a planned trip or after the return date has already passed.
Questions and answers
Who can apply for a travel ban order for a minor in Israel?
According to Kol Zchut, a parent who fears that the other parent will take the child abroad and not bring the child back, provided that his or her guardianship of the child has not been limited or revoked. The application is filed with the Family Court, and as a rule no special grounds need to be shown. Lifting the order requires the consent of both parents or a court decision.
Is keeping a child abroad after an agreed trip considered abduction?
It may be. Under Article 3 of the Hague Convention, which was given the force of law in Israel in 1991, retaining a child in another country in breach of custody rights under the law of the child's habitual residence is also wrongful, where those rights were actually exercised. Under Article 13, the other parent's consent or later acquiescence may serve as a defense.
What should I do if the other parent has not brought my child back from abroad?
Act quickly. If the country has joined the Hague Convention, you apply to the Central Authority, which in Israel is the Attorney General (section 4 of the Law), and the decision on return is made by the competent authority in the country where the child is (Article 12 of the Convention). When proceedings begin within one year of the wrongful removal or retention, the child must be ordered returned forthwith, and the Convention applies until the child turns 16.
Source: Bizportal (Hebrew), 11.11.2026; Hague Convention (Return of Abducted Children) Law, 5751-1991, on the Knesset website (Hebrew), 20.5.1991; Kol Zchut: Obtaining a travel ban order for a minor (Hebrew), checked 12.11.2026; Kol Zchut: Urgent proceedings to secure contact between parents and children (Hebrew), checked 12.11.2026
First published in Hebrew. Read the Hebrew original