UAE Court Upholds Wife’s Right To Maintenance Despite Husband’s Claims Of Financial Hardship
In a significant 2025 family law ruling, the UAE Court of Cassation reaffirmed that a husband cannot avoid his legal responsibility to maintain his wife and children merely by making unsupported claims of financial hardship or alleging “rebellious conduct” by the wife without evidence. The judgement also clarified that a mother is not legally required to bear child-related expenses when the father is financially capable.
Background Of The Dispute
The dispute arose after reconciliation efforts between a married couple failed. The wife approached the Personal Status Court seeking spousal maintenance and financial support for herself and her two children.
She requested AED 5,000 per month as maintenance, excluding housing expenses. In addition, she sought continuation of the family villa as the matrimonial residence, payment of utility bills, the maid’s salary, school fees, educational supplies, transportation support, Eid clothing expenses for the children, and compensation to furnish the marital home under the UAE Personal Status Law.
The wife argued that she was legally married to the respondent and had lived with him throughout the marriage while raising their children. According to her, despite the husband earning more than AED 40,000 per month and owning several assets — including land, vehicles, and business licenses — he had failed to adequately support the family.
Decision Of The Court Of First Instance
After examining the evidence, the Court of First Instance partly accepted the wife’s claims and directed the husband to provide the following:
- AED 3,000 per month as spousal maintenance, excluding housing;
- Continued provision of the family villa as the marital residence;
- Payment of all utility bills related to the house;
- Payment of the maid’s salary;
- School tuition and transportation fees for the children, to the extent not covered by the wife’s employer;
- A laptop worth AED 1,500 for each child;
- Child maintenance of AED 2,000 per month for each child;
- AED 1,500 transportation allowance for the wife and children;
- AED 1,000 per child for Eid clothing during each Eid festival.
However, the court rejected some of the wife’s additional claims.
Court Awarded Maintenance Summary
| Type Of Support | Amount / Relief Granted |
|---|---|
| Spousal Maintenance | AED 3,000 Per Month |
| Child Maintenance | AED 2,000 Per Child Per Month |
| Transportation Allowance | AED 1,500 |
| Eid Clothing Allowance | AED 1,000 Per Child |
| Laptop For Children | AED 1,500 Per Child |
| Housing | Continuation Of Family-Villa |
Appeals Before The Higher Courts
Both spouses challenged the ruling before the Court of Appeal. The appellate court heard both appeals together but ultimately upheld the trial court’s decision in full.
Still dissatisfied, the husband moved the UAE Court of Cassation in Case No. 710/2025, challenging several parts of the judgement.
Husband’s Arguments Before The Court Of Cassation
The husband argued that the lower courts had misunderstood his financial position and imposed obligations beyond his actual capacity.
According to him:
- His monthly income was approximately AED 35,000, not higher as claimed;
- One plot of land was occupied by his mother as her residence;
- The commercial licenses mentioned by the wife were inactive;
- His vehicles were old and of limited value.
To support his defence, he produced salary certificates and bank statements, asserting that the courts failed to properly consider those documents. He also contended that he had financial liabilities and loans which affected his ability to pay maintenance.
The husband further claimed that the wife had forfeited her right to maintenance because she allegedly refused marital relations and left the matrimonial home without his consent. According to him, such conduct amounted to “rebellion” under UAE family law.
Court Of Cassation Rejects Husband’s Claims
The Court of Cassation dismissed all the husband’s objections and upheld the earlier rulings.
The court relied on Articles 95 and 96(1) of the UAE Personal Status Law, which recognise maintenance as a legal right dependent on the needs of the recipient and the financial capacity of the provider. The court noted that although the husband alleged financial burdens and debts, he failed to prove them with convincing evidence.
On the issue of the wife’s alleged disobedience, the court referred to Articles 99 and 103 of the Personal Status Law. These provisions establish that a wife is entitled to maintenance under a valid marriage, regardless of her own wealth, unless the husband proves legally recognised grounds for forfeiture, such as unjustified refusal to cohabit or maintain marital relations.
Importantly, the court clarified that the burden of proof lies on the husband to establish forfeiture of maintenance rights. In contrast, the wife only needs to prove non-payment of maintenance. Since the husband failed to produce sufficient evidence of misconduct, his allegations were rejected.
Key Legal Principles Applied By The Court
| Legal Principle | Court’s Observation |
|---|---|
| Maintenance Rights | Maintenance Is A Legal Right Under UAE Personal Status Law |
| Burden Of Proof | Husband Must Prove Grounds For Forfeiture |
| Financial Incapacity | Must Be Proven Through Reliable Evidence |
| Wife’s Wealth | Does Not Cancel Her Right To Maintenance |
Testimony Of Family Members Held Admissible
One of the notable aspects of the judgement was the court’s discussion on witness credibility.
The husband attempted to challenge the testimony of the wife’s witnesses on the ground that they were related to her. However, the court ruled that testimony from siblings or relatives is legally admissible in family disputes unless there is clear proof that the witness stands to gain personal benefit or avoid loss through such testimony. Mere personal disagreement between parties does not automatically invalidate witness evidence.
Since the husband failed to demonstrate bias or ulterior motive, the witness testimony remained valid and enforceable.
Court Clarifies Child Maintenance Responsibility
The husband also objected to the transportation allowance awarded to the wife and children, arguing that the wife already owned a car.
Rejecting this argument, the Court of Cassation referred to Article 106 of the Federal Personal Status Law, which places responsibility for maintaining minor children on the father if the children have no independent financial means.
The court clarified that the mother becomes legally responsible for supporting the children only in two exceptional situations:
- When the father is deceased and leaves behind no estate; or
- When the father is financially incapable of supporting the child.
Therefore, the wife could not be compelled to use her own resources or vehicle for the children’s transportation while the father remained financially capable.
When A Mother Becomes Responsible For Child Maintenance
| Situation | Mother’s Responsibility |
|---|---|
| Father Is Deceased Without Assets | Mother Must Support Child If Financially Capable |
| Father Is Financially Incapable | Mother Must Provide Support |
| Father Is Financially Capable | Primary Responsibility Remains With Father |
Procedural Objections Also Dismissed
The husband additionally sought suspension of the proceedings, arguing that issues relating to the wife’s alleged disobedience required separate adjudication.
The Court rejected this request under Article 104 of the UAE Civil Procedure Code, holding that such matters fall squarely within the jurisdiction of the Personal Status Court and do not constitute independent issues requiring a stay of proceedings.
Latest Legal Significance of the Judgement
This ruling is being viewed as an important reaffirmation of family protection principles under UAE law. The judgement reinforces several key legal principles:
- A husband cannot escape maintenance obligations without strong documentary proof of financial incapacity;
- Allegations of disobedience or marital misconduct must be clearly established through evidence;
- Women retain maintenance rights during a valid marriage regardless of personal wealth;
- Child maintenance primarily remains the father’s responsibility;
- Family-member testimony can be accepted in personal status disputes when legally credible.
The decision also reflects the UAE judiciary’s continued emphasis on balancing financial fairness with the welfare of spouses and children in family disputes.
Conclusion
The UAE Court of Cassation ultimately upheld all earlier rulings and dismissed the husband’s appeal. The court found that the wife had successfully proved non-payment of maintenance, while the husband failed to establish either financial incapacity or legal grounds to deny maintenance.
The judgement further clarified that a mother is obligated to financially support her child only if the father has died without leaving assets or if he is genuinely unable to provide support. Even in such situations, the mother may later seek reimbursement from the father if he regains financial capacity.
