The Dubai Court of Appeal upheld a ruling by a court of first instance to divorce an Arab woman with a dowry divorce, as evidenced by her husband’s permission for his friend to have a relationship in the marital home during the absence of the wife, who discovered this through surveillance cameras, in addition to assaulting her by beating.
It also upheld other clauses in the primary judgment, but canceled his judgment related to the vision request due to the end of the lawsuit regarding this request between the disputing spouses, and ruled that 13 thousand dirhams be deducted from the total amounts due to the wife, and ruled in the wife’s interest a service expense, and a transportation expense of 1000 dirhams per month, and amended the appealed judgment. In the amount of marital and filiation maintenance, to increase it to 2200 dirhams per month for spousal support, and 1800 dirhams per month for filiation support.
In detail, an Arab woman filed a lawsuit before the Personal Status Court in Dubai, in which she requested a divorce because of her severe mistreatment by her husband, by beating and insulting her and expelling her from the marital home.
She added that she was on a visit to her country, and opened the home cameras that she used to monitor her child while she was at work, and she was shocked by seeing one of the defendant’s friends in an inappropriate position in her bedroom with a woman other than his wife, while her husband was in the living room.
The legal representative of the plaintiff, the legal advisor, Muhammad Najeeb, stated that his client interrupted her leave to clarify what was happening in terms of desecration of her home by the defendant and his friends, and by confronting him with that, he assaulted her by beating and cursing, and divorced her for the second time.
He added that she resorted to family reform at the Personal Status Court in Dubai to resolve the dispute amicably, but that was not possible, which prompted her to file a lawsuit, and then the court offered reconciliation to the two parties, and it was also impossible.
For his part, the defendant denied the statements of the plaintiff, pointing to the recurrence of the problems between them, and her leaving the house more than once, indicating his desire to continue marital life between them, and that he was still spending on her by giving her his own bank card, and he attached copies of bank transfers, and asked the court to direct Decisive oath to his wife in stating that.
After examining the case, the Court of First Instance ruled a deferred dowry of 50,000 dirhams, housing alimony of 6,000 dirhams, marital alimony of 2,000 dirhams per month, proof of custody of the child, obligating him to alimony of 1,600 dirhams, and 45,000 dirhams of annual housing rent, with appropriate furniture provided once at a value of 10 dirhams. Thousands of dirhams, granting her a nursery fee of 500 dirhams per month, and obligating him to obtain a health card for the child.
While the court rejected the wife’s request to grant her a sum of 120,000 dirhams for pleasure, because the divorce is for harm and not from the will of the husband, and it also obliged her to enable him to see the little girl once a week in a public place.
She clarified the reasons for her ruling regarding her ruling to divorce the wife for harm. Allowing a third party to use the marital home to establish a relationship with a woman, regardless of his relationship with her, even if she is his wife, assuming the validity of the narration of the husband who did not provide evidence of that, is contrary to Sharia and the law, as Islamic legislation did not leave the marital home to the winds of passion and subjective mood, but rather legislated Clear controls and limits in not allowing others to use it, and doing so is considered a flagrant violation that causes harm to the wife, with which it is impossible to continue the marital relationship with favor.
For their part, the two parties to the case did not accept the initial judgment and challenged it before the Court of Appeal, which clarified in the merits of its ruling that it shares the appealed judgment’s answer to the request for divorce for damages and entitlement to spousal alimony, and that he did not provide evidence showing that the woman who was with his friend in his bedroom was the wife of the latter.
2023-06-30 22:06:47
#Divorcing #woman #inappropriate #behavior #part #husband #friend
