A mother waives custody of her 5-month-old child

The Federal Supreme Court upheld the right of a father to continue custody of his 5-month-old daughter. The court confirmed that the mother had no right to claim custody after she had given her consent on the basis of a prior agreement documented in the Family Reconciliation and Conciliation Commission.

The court stated that the survival of the girl at her mother, who left her during her early childhood and her need, contrary to her interest and safety, is what leads to the impact on the normal course of life, especially since the mother did not offer anything to care for the father and the custody and care, especially during the absence of the mother continued.

In detail, a divorcee filed a lawsuit against her divorcee, demanding to drop his custody of her 5-month-old daughter, annexing her and obliging him to pay a comprehensive expense for her, explaining that "his wife was religiously divorced and gave birth to her on the right marriage bed of the girl mentioned."

The Court of Appeal ruled that the first sentence was overturned, the father's custody for his incubated daughter was dropped, transferred to the mother's custody and obliged to pay for the incubated one thousand and two hundred dirhams for food, clothing and treatment monthly and the amount of one thousand and three hundred dirhams fare of nursery dwelling monthly, and furnishing the amount of five thousand dirhams The amount of two hundred dirhams allowance for electricity, water, gas and sewage per month, provided that the maintenance and the fare of the dwelling and its dependents from the date of receipt of the mother of the incubator and return the claim on custody fare to the court of first instance to adjudicate.

The father did not accept this verdict and appealed against it by way of cassation, explaining that the appeal ruling exceeded the rule of the authoritative order, for violating the agreement between the parties before the Conciliation and Reconciliation Commission, according to which the mother gave her consent to custody of the girl mentioned.

The Federal Supreme Court upheld this appeal, pointing out that "it is decided in the provisions of Islamic law glue that reconciliation is a contract of consensual contract, which raises the dispute and cut off the dispute between the reconcilable consensual."
The court pointed out that it is decided by the text of article 16/2 of the Personal Status Law that if reconciliation between the parties before the Family Steering Committee, this reconciliation is established in a record signed by the parties and adopted by the judge and has the power of executive support and may not be challenged by any means of appeal only If he breaches the provisions of the law, then this contract shall be concluded as long as it is concluded between the two parties. No party may revoke it, terminate it or amend it, especially since it is a valid and effective right that is necessary for both parties.

She pointed out that the reconciliation report, which was made between the complainants before the Conciliation and Reconciliation Commission, that the terms of the agreement of the parties to be custody of their daughter, when her opponent's father in the dispute, and this agreement was valid consensual documented and approved and therefore no party can revoke it or annul it or amend it Except by mutual consent or proven interest of the custodians otherwise.

It is also decided in the provisions of Islamic law glue that custody is a manifestation of the care of Islamic legislation in childhood as the human in his childhood desperately needs to take care of and prepare for life, and custody is to save the child and raising and care.

It is also prescribed both by law and by law that custody, although related to the three rights (a) the right of the father (b) the right of the custodian (c) the right of custody, but the right of custody is paramount, and if it appears that the interest of the custodian to stay with his father or others, Custody is given to him because the nursery revolves with the interest of the custodians and non-existence.

The court affirmed that the assessment of the interest of the custodian is considered as a matter of fact that the court of first instance has jurisdiction over the court subject to unsupervised judgments when the judgment is based on justifiable reasons sufficient to carry it and is not wasted on the evidence presented in the lawsuit.

The court concluded that the appeal judgment did not take into account all of this and did not assess that the survival of the girl at her mother, who left her during her early childhood and her need, contrary to her interest and safety, which leads to affect the normal course of life, especially since the mother did not offer anything to care for the father In the absence of the mother's continuous appeal, and in contravention of this consideration and the custody of the mother despite the previous agreement on them, he has violated the fixed papers, which dragged him into contravention of the law, which must be overturned and addressed.