Divorce ruling upheld

ABU DHABI - The Supreme Federal Court has turned down a case filed by an ex-husband who requested that a verdict against him issued by the Abu Dhai Shariah Appeal Court be annulled. The lower court had ruled that he be divorced from his wife and also ordered him to pay alimony for his two daughters.



By A Staff Reporter

Published: Sun 14 Aug 2005, 11:11 PM

Last updated: Thu 2 Apr 2015, 7:13 PM

According to the case history, Najma Masaed filed a case against her husband Abdul Rahman Ali, demanding to be divorced because her husband did not cover her expenses properly and insulted her. She demanded custody of her two daughters, Sana and Nada, 10 and three and a half years' old respectively. She also demanded alimony, a maid and accommodation for the girls by the husband. Since she did not receive any alimony from her husband, the Court of First Instance granted her divorce and also enabled the husband to recant the divorce if he could manage to provide her with the expenses before the expiry of the legal period given by the Shariah law (Eda). The Court also granted her custody over her daughters, but turned down her request for accommodation and a maid for the girls. Najma and Abdul Rahman appealed At the Abu Dhabi Shariah Court which ordered that the woman be divorced from her husband, and the man to pay her Dh600 in alimony for support of the two girls from the date the appeal verdict was issued.

Abdul Rahman appealed again, arguing that the divorce verdict was based on the statements of two witnesses he had never met before and who worked for his father-in-law.

The Court, however, observed that the allegations were baseless, because his contention that he did not know the witnesses was not substantiated by any evidence.

The Court stated that divorce was Najma's legitimate right in the light of Abdul Rahman's behaviour against her, as confirmed by the two witnesses who had stated in the court that they had heard Abdul Rahman insult Najma, describing her as "ill-mannered" and that she was a prostitute. The Court rejected the appeal filed by Abdul Rahman and ordered him to pay the case fee.


More news from