It entails rights and duties between the legal guardian and the minor

“Dubai Appeal” responds to a father’s guardianship over his daughter, despite his relinquishing it

• «Dubai Appeal» canceled the ruling of the Personal Status Court of First Instance.

  archival

• Badr Abdullah Khamis: "The right of guardianship is inherent to the father, and his waiver of it in the agreement clearly violates law and public order."

picture

The Dubai Court of Appeal canceled a ruling by the Personal Status Court of First Instance depriving a father of guardianship over his 7-year-old daughter, based on an agreement between the parents according to which he agreed to waive guardianship. The conciliation agreement in which he waived it violates public order and explicit law.

In detail, an (Arab) father filed a lawsuit demanding the nullification of a reconciliation agreement with his wife, in which he waived the right of guardianship over his child, as the agreement violated the public order and explicit provisions of the Personal Status Law.

The father based his claim on the fact that the mother was not keen on their daughter, as she traveled outside the country, which deprived her of her right to be in her school during long periods, as well as her failure to provide the necessary medical care because she was sick with autism, which necessitates dropping the nursery from her and joining her to him, especially in light of the residence His mother is in the country.

For her part, his ex-wife demanded in a counter-claim to increase the living expenses of the girl to 7,000 dirhams per month, and obligate him to provide housing at the amount of 70,000 dirhams annually, and a furniture allowance of 25,000 dirhams every three years, as well as monthly bills of 2,000 dirhams for electricity, gas, etc., and payment of the girl’s study expenses. And a car worth 200,000 dirhams, a driver and a maid, and health insurance for the girl.

She based her demands on the fact that she was divorced from him because of his actions that were endangering her safety and the life of their daughter, and she signed a settlement agreement with him in which he determined the divorce mechanism and the expenses, pointing out that she was working as a regional manager in an international company, and she could not continue her work due to the conditions of the Corona pandemic, and therefore the source was cut off Her income, denying her husband's accusations of negligence and failure to take care of their daughter, whether in study or medical care.

She explained that the agreement signed between them gives her the right to travel with the girl outside the country, without obtaining prior approval from him and notifying him via e-mail, noting that the alimony they agreed upon is no longer sufficient to meet the girl's need in light of the current economic conditions and the increase of her needs with her age.

The Court of First Instance rejected his request to cancel the clause of his waiver of guardianship, as he signed the agreement of his own free will.

In the opposite case by the mother, the court ruled obligating him to pay bills of 600 dirhams per month, specifying the residence of the maid and the Eid clothing for the girl, and rejecting all other requests.

The two parties were not satisfied with the initial ruling and appealed it before the Court of Appeal. The legal representative of the father, Lawyer Badr Abdullah Khamis, stated that the ruling of the first degree was wrong in not responding to the father’s requests, stressing that the right of guardianship is inherent to him, and his waiver of it in the agreement explicitly violates law and public order. In certain circumstances and under conditions that his divorcee did not abide by.

While the mother mourned her appeal against the mistake of the primary ruling in not responding to all of her requests, despite the improvement in the financial situation of her ex-husband and her entitlement to the expenses she demanded, for losing her job and needing money so that she can take care of her daughter.

After examining the two appeals, the Court of Appeal concluded that guardianship over the soul is for the father, and then for the one who is in control of the inheritance arrangement, stressing that guardianship is of great importance due to the rights and duties that it entails between the legal guardian and the minor, and it is transferred only according to the conditions established by law and law, and it is not correct to tamper with However, some of its works, but not all of them, can be waived.

The court decided to cancel the clause of the father’s waiver of guardianship from the agreement signed between the two parties, because it is an invalid clause that violates the Sharia and legal rules and he may rescind it and restore the situation to its previous era.

• The father based his claim on the fact that the mother was not keen on their daughter, as she traveled outside the country, which deprived her of her right to be in her school for long periods, in addition to her failure to provide the necessary medical care because she has autism.

Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news