The Court of Cassation in Abu Dhabi, the Gulf Court obliged to pay 2500 dirhams per month fare for the custody of a divorced woman, and uphold the ruling of the Court of Appeal in the section on the refusal of the woman's request to pay her expenses and equipment and the driver and maid, noting in her ruling that the absolute entitlement to pleasure is conditional on divorce Issued by the husband on his own volition without a request from the wife for divorce, and the divorced divorce is a good and is not pregnant does not have the expense of kit.
The details of the case are due to the wife filing her husband's suit demanding divorce for the damage and proving her custody of her son from him and obliging him to pay the expenses of kit and pleasure and maintenance for their child and custody fare, and to provide her with a nursery house, maid and car with her driver, and to hand her a true copy of the family book and the child's passport. However, her husband was harmed by libel, abandonment and eviction from the marital home.
The Court of First Instance ruled that the husband should pay the husband the maintenance of her son from him 2000 dirhams per month, and rejected the rest of the lawsuit, the appellant appealed the verdict, and the Court of Appeal ruled to abolish the judgment of the appellant in the subject of divorce and custody and its dependencies and the judiciary again divorce the appellant shot and prove custody of her son from him and compel the husband To pay her in the custody fare 300 dirhams per month from the date of expiry of the kit and with the support of the appealed judgment otherwise, this provision was not accepted by the appellant and challenged him before the Court of Cassation.
The appellant called the contested judgment a violation of the law, inadequate reasoning, corruption in reasoning, a violation of papers and a breach of the right of defense, and built on two reasons. First, the contested judgment erred in supporting the appealed judgment, which set the appealer in the amount of her son's maintenance and in the custody fare amount less than The amount owed to her, and the refusal of her requests relating to the expenses of kit, pleasure, maid and car with her driver, despite the entitlement to do so with which the contested judgment is defective to be overturned.
She stated that the second reason for her obedience is that the contested judgment mentioned in his reasons the judiciary to the appellant to rent a nursery house 2000 dirhams per month and did not realize it in its operative, and this contradiction must be overturned in this part of it and the judiciary obliged against him to pay the custody of the house more than the amount of 2000 dirhams because A small amount is not enough to get a suitable nursery.
The Court of Cassation stated that the Court of First Instance has the full authority to obtain an understanding of the reality of the case, to assess the maintenance and its aftermath of service, transport and custody, and to determine what is necessary for the spender to take into consideration his material condition and what he does not need to take into account from its discretion. Article 140 of the same law stipulates that the divorcee's entitlement to pleasure is conditional on the fact that the divorce is issued by the husband of his own volition without the wife's request for divorce. If issued by the Court And judgments at the request of the wife is not worth absolute fun.
The court clarified that the contested verdict established the basis of his judgment in support of the appealed verdict, while upholding that the child's need due to his young age "did not complete his second year", and the financial situation of the appellant against him, who has not proved any income, and all this requires that the child's comprehensive transportation and fees Water and electricity are 2000 dirhams, and the custody fare is 300 dirhams, and the contestant must not be obliged to do so by the maid or by car.It is also not necessary to enjoy the fun and expense of the kit because it is not legally entitlement to them.Accordingly, the judgment shall be correct in what he went to, and then this obituary is free to reject.
The court overturned the partially contested verdict on the fare of the foster home, and canceled the appeals ruling rejecting the application concerning the foster home, and ruled that the appellant against him should pay the fare of the nursery house 2500 dirhams per month and obligate him to one third of the fee and expenses and the fate of the appellant.