“Dubai Discrimination” upheld the initial ruling and the “appeal” by entitlement to custody

A man accuses his ex-wife of endangering the lives of his two children to lose custody of her

Dubai Court obligated the father to pay the expenses.

Photography: Patrick Castillo

The Dubai Court of Cassation resolved a family dispute between a father and a mother, from an Arab country, over the custody of their two sons, and other matters related to expenses and the rights of the mother and the two children. nursery, and obligated him to pay 20,000 dirhams annually for housing and furniture rent, to be paid once.

The court turned away from accusing his divorcee of being dishonest against his two children, endangering their lives, and committing actions that necessitated the abolition of her custody, and that she exceeded a previous ruling issued by the competent court in their country, obligating her not to reside in another country, so as not to deprive the father of his legitimate right to see his children, and perform his duties towards them.

After considering the case by the Court of First Instance, it ruled that the mother was entitled to custody of her two children, and obligated him to pay various expenses. He appealed the ruling before the Court of Appeal, which upheld the ruling of the first degree, and the litigation continued until the Court of Cassation.

The father’s legal representative argued before the Court of Cassation that the mother risked the lives of the two children, traveled illegally from her country to another country, obtained two new passports for them, and then moved to the UAE after that, noting that the Court of First Instance overlooked in its ruling the factors that required dropping her nursery.

For his part, Legal Counsel, Muhammad Naguib, stated in the memorandum responding to the father’s arguments that what the latter raised about the mother and the two children’s illegal exit from their countries are being asked by the courts there, but nevertheless the mother provided an explanation about the legality of her entry to the UAE, and her permanent residence. legal.

He pointed out that obtaining alternative passports for the two children could not have been done without obtaining the father's approval, and this is a procedure that cannot be bypassed, stressing that the mother provided her children with a decent life.

On the father’s defense of the custodian’s right to custody if he settled in a country in which it is difficult for the custodian to perform his duties, the Court of Cassation clarified in the merits of the ruling that the mother moved to live in the UAE, where the father has a valid residence in it, entered the two children into school, extracted two health insurance cards for them, and rented They have a home, and you have joined a job in Dubai, and then you will not have settled in a country where it is difficult for a father to fulfill his duties towards his two children.

The court stated that the father did not provide evidence of his stability, settlement and work in his homeland, and his words about the mother's endangering the safety of her two sons were no more than statements sent without evidence.

She emphasized that the street made the matter of custody in the early childhood stage of women's affairs, because the child at that stage of his life needs their care, because they are attached to him, and he is given good care of him, and there are no factors that drop the mother's custody.

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