A stressful surprise waits for many foreign families: owning assets in Israel and inheriting under Israeli law are two different things. An American who dies in Florida owning a Tel Aviv apartment. A British citizen living in London with an Israeli bank account. A French national who kept property in Paris after making aliyah. Every one of these estates raises the same threshold question before anybody can be confirmed as an heir. Which country's inheritance law actually governs?
The answer changes who inherits and how much. Countries divide estates in strikingly different ways. England gives a surviving spouse a large fixed sum and splits the remainder with the children. France reserves mandatory shares for children that a will cannot cut out. Israel's own intestacy rules hand the spouse half and the children the other half. Choose the wrong governing law and you can name the wrong heirs, distribute the wrong shares, and leave the whole succession order open to challenge years later. This guide walks through how Israeli law selects the governing law, and what that choice means in practice for a foreign family.
1. Overview
Cross-border estates raise two separate questions that people tend to blur together. The first is jurisdiction: which country's authorities are entitled to open the file and issue orders? The second is the applicable, or governing, law: whose substantive inheritance rules decide the identity of the heirs and the size of their shares? These are not the same question, and the answers frequently point to different countries. A single Israeli estate can sit in front of an Israeli authority that is applying English, American, or French inheritance law.
Israel's rules on this subject live in Chapter Seven of the Succession Law 5725-1965 (Sections 136 to 142), the part of the statute dealing with private international law. The cornerstone is the connecting factor chosen in Section 137: the law of the place where the deceased was domiciled at the time of death. Everything else in this guide is either a refinement of that rule or an exception to it.
2. When Israeli Authorities Have Jurisdiction
Section 136 sets the reach of the Israeli system. An Israeli court and the Registrar of Inheritance Affairs (הרשם לענייני ירושה) have jurisdiction over the estate of a person who, at the time of death, either was domiciled in Israel or left assets in Israel. The second limb is the one that pulls in most foreign families. A relative who lived and died abroad but held a Bank Leumi account, a Netanya apartment, or shares in an Israeli company has "left assets in Israel," so Israeli jurisdiction attaches to those assets.
Jurisdiction is what you need before anything can move. Israeli banks will not release a balance, the Land Registry (Tabu) will not re-register an apartment, and the Companies Registrar will not record a share transfer, unless they are handed an Israeli succession order (tzav yerusha) where there is no will, or an Israeli probate order (tzav kiyum tzava'ah) where there is one. A grant of probate obtained in New York or London, however valid at home, does not by itself instruct an Israeli institution to act.
3. The General Rule: The Deceased's Domicile
Section 137 provides the default answer to the governing-law question: succession is regulated by the law of the deceased's domicile at the time of death. The Hebrew term is makom moshav (מקום מושב), and it does not mean citizenship, it does not mean where the person happened to die, and it does not mean where the property sits. It means the place that was the centre of the person's life when they died: where they kept their home, where their family was based, where they worked, and where their main social and economic ties lay.
The distinction catches people out. A dual Israeli-British national who spent the last thirty years in Manchester is domiciled in England for these purposes, so English succession rules decide the heirs to their estate, including the movable assets they held in Israel, even though they carried an Israeli passport. Conversely, a person who moved their whole life to Israel is domiciled in Israel, and Israeli law governs their worldwide succession, whatever passport they held.
One technical wrinkle deserves a flag. If the foreign domicile's own conflict-of-laws rules point back to Israeli law (because that country applies the law of nationality, or refers real property to the country where it is located), an Israeli court may accept the reference and apply Israeli law after all. This "renvoi" question is one of the reasons a genuinely cross-border estate belongs with a practitioner who handles them regularly rather than with a general form-filling service.
4. Israeli Real Estate and Special Property
Here sits the most misunderstood point in the whole subject. A common shorthand says that movable assets follow the deceased's domicile while Israeli real estate is always governed by Israeli law. That is a useful rule of thumb, but it is an oversimplification of what the statute actually says, and treating it as a certainty has cost families dearly.
Section 137, read on its own, applies domicile law to the entire estate, movable and immovable alike. The exception comes from Section 138, which carves out property that, under the law of the place where it is located, is subject to a special succession regime, one where the law of the situs claims exclusive competence over how that particular property passes. For a great deal of ordinary Israeli real estate, whether that exception bites is genuinely debated among Israeli scholars and practitioners. Some courts and many practising lawyers apply Israeli law to Israeli immovables on a situs basis; the academic position is more cautious and asks whether Israeli law truly imposes a special regime on the specific asset. The safe conclusion for a foreign owner is not to assume either way, but to get the point analysed for the specific property before an order is drafted.
Where Section 138 clearly does apply is agricultural land, and that catches many diaspora families who inherited a share in a family nachala.
5. Foreign Wills: Form and Capacity
A separate set of rules decides whether a will made abroad is recognised in Israel, quite apart from which law governs the distribution. This matters because a foreign will rarely follows Israeli witnessing formalities, and families worry that it will be thrown out for that reason. Usually it is not.
Section 140 is a deliberately generous "validating" rule on the form of a will. A will is treated as formally valid in Israel if it satisfies the formal requirements of any one of several connected laws: the law of the place where it was made, or the law of the deceased's domicile, habitual residence, or nationality, measured either when the will was signed or at death. A will executed correctly under New York or English formalities therefore clears the Israeli formal-validity bar even though it was signed with two witnesses rather than in one of the four Israeli forms. Capacity to make the will (age and mental competence) is judged under the law connected to the testator at the time of signing, addressed in the same chapter of the statute.
Recognition of form is not the end of the process. The foreign will still has to be admitted to probate in Israel to produce a tzav kiyum tzava'ah, and that requires the underlying documents in a form Israeli authorities accept.
6. Proving Foreign Law in Israel
When Section 137 sends the succession to a foreign law, that law does not simply announce itself to the Israeli authority. Israeli courts do not take judicial notice of foreign law. Foreign law is treated as a question of fact that has to be proved by expert evidence, and until it is proved, the Israeli file cannot conclude who the heirs are.
The vehicle is a foreign-law opinion (חוות דעת דין זר): a written, sworn opinion from a lawyer or recognised expert qualified in the relevant foreign system, setting out who inherits under that law and in what shares, and attaching the relevant statutory text. Because assessing foreign law is a judicial function, the Registrar of Inheritance Affairs will generally decline to determine it and will transfer the file to the Family Court (Beit HaMishpat LeInyanei Mishpacha), which hears the expert evidence and issues the order.
7. Worked Scenarios and Planning
Three short scenarios show how the rules combine.
- American domiciled in Florida, owns a Tel Aviv apartment. Israel has jurisdiction because the asset is in Israel (Section 136). Under Section 137, Florida law governs the movable estate; the apartment falls into the debated situs question under Section 138. Practically, the family obtains an Israeli order and, because domicile is abroad, files a Florida-law opinion, with the real-estate treatment analysed for that specific property.
- French national domiciled in Paris with an Israeli investment portfolio. French law governs under Section 137. France's réserve héréditaire reserves fixed shares for the children, so a will that leaves everything to a spouse or a charity may be only partly enforceable against the Israeli movable assets. The reserved shares travel with the domicile law.
- Foreign citizen who made aliyah and is now domiciled in Israel. Israeli law governs the entire worldwide succession, citizenship notwithstanding. People are often startled to learn that their American or British home-country inheritance expectations do not follow them once their life has genuinely moved to Israel.
The planning takeaways follow directly. Anyone with assets in more than one country should coordinate their wills rather than draft them in isolation. A well-drafted Israeli will limited to Israeli-situs assets speeds up Israeli probate and avoids a foreign-law opinion for those assets, but its revocation clause must be worded so it does not accidentally cancel the foreign will, and vice versa. Where the deceased may be domiciled in a forced-heirship country, plan around the reserved shares instead of pretending a will can defeat them. And where domicile itself is arguable, build the documentary record of where life is centred while the person is alive, because that record is far harder to assemble after death.