The Personal Status Court in Ras al-Khaimah rejected a lawsuit filed by a (Gulf) wife, demanding that she divorce her for harm, obliging her to enter into obedience to the husband in the marital home and exchanging respect, and obliging her to limit the work of the maid to the marital home.
The wife's lawyer stated that the husband had done harm to her that she could not bear, and she renounced the responsibility of the house and his child, and he did not spend on her or his daughter.
He demanded that she divorce her for harm, while preserving her legal rights, from the expense of waiting and pleasure and the back of the dowry, and to prove her daughter's custody, and to compel him to pay the monthly expenses, provide custody housing, pay bills for electricity, water, internet, and gas, and treat his daughter’s expenses and provide maid.
The husband’s lawyer, Abdullah Sarhan, filed a lawsuit in which he stated that his client worked as a lecturer to prove a case at the police station and the Family Guidance and Reform Department in the courts of Ras Al Khaimah, in which the defendant demanded to enter into his obedience and not to take the maid out of the house and go with her to her family and not to involve her family in their affairs The family, after her frequent departure from the home as a result of marital disputes.
He demanded that the lawsuit be dismissed for lack of evidence, and that the plaintiff enter to obey the husband and not remove the maid from the house, as the court ordered in a session prior to the pronouncement of the ruling to refer the case to the investigation to listen to the testimony of witnesses of the damage to the plaintiff, and to prove the defendant contrary to what the plaintiff stated, and the wife's brother stated that his sister She was staying at the husband's sister's house and did not find comfort at home, as the defendant was bringing his friends home.
He explained that the plaintiff left the house on its own, and that the husband did not spend on it, pointing out that the damages that she sustained were the lack of marital housing.
The lawyer for the husband stated that the testimony of the witness came free from the truth, and his claim that the husband does not possess a marital home is contrary to the truth and the requirements of reasoning, pointing out that the wife left from the marital home to the home of her relatives without the husband’s approval, which must be returned to the marital home as long as the obligations of abandonment have been negated. .
The court accepted the husband's requests, ruled that the case be rejected and obliged the wife to enter into obedience to the defendant, decide the marital home, take care of marital interests, and exchange it with respect, and compel her to limit the work of the maid to the marital home.