In the name of God, the most gracious the most merciful
Al Rasheeda Mustafa Al Senari
Khalafallah Hussain Khalifa
Sameer Mohamed Al Sayed Ahmed
Hamed Mohamed Ahmed Hajar
Fayezah Hamza Ali Mohamed

Presiding Judge

The appealed judgment issued by Al Shagara Sharia Court in respect of the judgment No.
On 02/04/2014 a judgment was delivered by the Judge of Al Shagara Personal Status Court
of First Degree in relation to the Case No. 1176/2013. The judgment was pronounced in
presence of the parties Plaintiff Fayza Hamza Ali Mohamed against defendant Hamid
Mohamed Ahmed Hagar divorcing her from him on the ground of incompatibility with
effect from 02/04/2014, the date of judgment, and ordering her to count her lawful waiting
On 17/04/2014 Advocate Nafisa Hagar submitted this appeal against the judgment of the
trial court on behalf of the losing party (appellant). The appeal was formally accepted within
the required legal time frame contained in Article (192) read with Article (177/2) of Civil
Procedures Act for 1983.
Ms. Nafisa said that the judgment of the trial court was incorrect as it divorced the
respondent (plaintiff) without ordering compensation in his favor; nevertheless both
arbitrators sent by the trial court decided a compensation. Ms. Nafisa said that the trial
court based its judgment on the respondent`s statements and ignored the arbitrators`
decision on compensation. Ms. Nafisa claimed for cancellation of the judgment of the trial
court on divorce without compensation.
The respondent was notified to provide a reply. Her reply narrated all that took place since
the fault-based divorce case was filed, which was dismissed on the ground of
incompatibility. She said that both arbitrators asked her about every nook and cranny and
about the reason for their differences. She said that the trial judge has not ordered recovery
of dowry in favor of the appellant for which he claimed because dowry cannot be recovered
from Sharia point of view. She said that the trial court has not grounded its judgment on her
statements (respondent`s statements) but examined the arbitrators` decision properly. She
claimed for upholding the judgment of the trial court and delivery of the marriage contract.
The summary of the facts as established in the minutes states that the respondent (plaintiff)
filed her case against the appellant (defendant) saying that she is his lawful wife under his
protection matrimonial authority, and previously has filed fault-based divorce case vide No.
538/2013, but was dismissed where incompatibility still persists and claimed for divorce on
the ground of incompatibility.

Select target paragraph3