The Federal Supreme Court rejected a man's appeal against a ruling that divorced his wife for damages and obliged him to pay the dowry and expenses to her and her children, stressing that the ruling reached a conclusion compliant with Islamic law and the law regarding dowry and expenses and the vision of the children and the rights of the alleged parties.

In detail, a woman filed a lawsuit against her husband, demanding that the judge divorce her and the dowry with custody of the children, expenses and accessories, housing, school and maid expenses, accommodation, health insurance, and car for the children and recovering the alleged amount of the defendant as a loan for his study, which he failed to repay to the plaintiff of AED 350,000.

Her husband also filed a suit, demanding that the defendant be obliged to see his children from her and receive his personal belongings such as clothes, special papers, certificates and medical books.

The Court of First Instance ruled two judgments, where they decided to differentiate the schism with a dirty shot in exchange for the back of the dowry and topple the wife's rights.

The court of first instance ruled that the plaintiff should hand over her husband's personal belongings such as books, television and special luggage specified in the operative sentence and enable him to see his two children overnight with him. He refused the request for a refund of the alleged amount of money that the Muslim defendant received as a loan to study and the car.

Then the Court of Appeal amended the first sentence, canceling the judiciary's refusal of the plaintiff with the alimony and deferred dowry and the judiciary again to the plaintiff by an amount of two thousand dirhams from the date of the judicial claim with the back of her dowry and amend the special expense of the two children to be 2,500 dirhams each and prove the allocation of the marital home To be the home of the nursery or his allowance estimated at five thousand five thousand dirhams with the modification of the visibility to be on Friday of each week without overnight at the non-custodian and the support of the ruling otherwise, and did not accept the parties to this ruling, we challenged it.

The Federal Supreme Court rejected the defendant's appeal regarding the judiciary to divorce the dowry at the end of the dowry despite his previous payment.

The court also rejected his appeal against the ruling on the expenses and its aftermath.

It also rejected his appeal against the verdict in which he decided on the refusal of the request to stay with the two children, stressing that he settled work in the Federal Supreme Court and in accordance with the Maliki doctrine and established in the State that the custodian can only stay at his incubator unless the parties agree otherwise, noting that the text of article 148 The explanatory memorandum stipulates that the custody of the custodian is only at his custody, unless the court can assess otherwise in the interest of the custodian himself.

The court rejected his appeal regarding the rejection by the judiciary of all his property, personal belongings, books and testimonies. It stated that it is prescribed in both Islamic law and the law that proof is a right of the litigants, as stipulated in Article 1 of the UAE Evidence Laws that the plaintiff must prove his right and the defendant is exiled. .