She went out with her friends, and her husband brought her the police
“Lack of respect” prompts a woman to request “khul’” after 17 years of marriage
Lawyer Muhammad Al-Mansoori: “The plaintiff hated married life, and was afraid that she would not establish the limits of God, and would not be able to give him his legitimate right.”
picture
An (Arab) wife did not despair after losing a legal dispute that extended from the Court of First Instance to “discrimination,” in which she demanded a divorce from her husband, after 17 years of marriage, for hating life with him, due to her disrespect. Marriage to the defendant by khul’, in return for forfeiting all her rights related to the marriage or annulment, and authorizing her to deposit the incoming dowry in the marriage contract voucher as a form of khul’.
After examining the case, the Personal Status Court of First Instance ruled to annul the marriage contract in return for the return of her dowry provider, her relinquishing the delay of her dowry, her waiver of the maintenance and her pleasure, and all her legal rights, attributing her ruling to the husband’s intransigence, and his insistence on maintaining the marriage despite their disagreement and unwillingness to continue The relationship, and her fear of not establishing the limits of God with him.
In detail, the long judicial dispute between these two spouses began in two phases, the first being a lawsuit filed by the wife asking for her to divorce her from her husband and granting her custody of the children, on the basis of the statement that he does not respect her, nor does he support her, and that she is more harmed than her staying on his custody, a harm that makes it impossible for ten to last. .
After examining the case, the Court of First Instance ruled for the dissolution of the marriage, in return for forfeiting all her financial rights resulting from the marriage or dissolution.
For his part, the husband appealed the ruling before the Court of Appeal, calling him a mistake in the application of the law, and after considering his appeal, the Court of Appeal ruled to cancel the initial ruling, and the Court of Cassation upheld the appeal ruling, and even rejected a petition to reconsider the case, to close the first track in the face of the wife .
The wife was not satisfied with this end, in light of her conviction that it was impossible to marry her husband, so she filed a new lawsuit requesting the annulment of the marriage contract.
Her legal representative, lawyer Muhammad Al-Awami Al-Mansoori, stated in the legal memorandum that his client did not explain the full aspects of the damage in the previous lawsuit, stressing that she hated married life, and was afraid not to establish the limits of God, and was not able to give him his legitimate right, and that he did not spend on her and her children. She is charged with all expenses, even though she lives in the same marital home.
He stated that the defendant brought his client the police when she was with her female colleagues outside the house, and he also created a problem with his daughter, and brought the police to the marital home, and she issued a complaint against him in turn, but she later gave it up under pressure from their sons, so that he would not be harmed in his work.
While the legal representative of the defendant spouse submitted a memorandum, in which he argued that this case may not be considered, because it has already been decided upon by a final ruling.
The court responded to the husband’s argument that the case may not be considered because it has already been decided by a final ruling, that the original rulings in personal status matters are that they are of temporary authority, because they are subject to change and alteration due to changing circumstances.
In the rationale for her ruling, she stated that the plaintiff had previously filed her case for divorce, and it was proven that she continued her hatred of married life, and her adherence to the annulment of her marriage to him, and her fear that she would not establish the limits of God, but he did not consent to that, and he ruled in his favour, but it was proven from the papers and during the consideration of previous cases between them the registration of a criminal report on charges of mutual assault.
Based on the foregoing, and in light of the fact that the situation between them has changed, and their nature is inconsistent, and the plaintiff declares that she is unable to grant him his legal rights, his payment is based on no evidence.
Therefore, the court ruled, in my presence, to annul the marriage contract by khul’, in return for the payment of the dowry refunded at 20 thousand dirhams, and the relinquishment of the rear at 20 thousand dirhams, and her waiver of the maintenance and enjoyment of her waiting period.
• The wife lost a long court dispute... and started another round that ended with a ruling in her favour.
Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news