Sharjah court rejects divorce plea over WhatsApp abuse claims

Sharjah: A woman in Sharjah has lost her bid to dissolve her marriage on the grounds of harm, after claiming that her husband treated her harshly at home and repeatedly insulted her through WhatsApp messages, Emarat Al Youm reported. 

According to court documents, the woman told the Sharjah Personal Status Court that her marriage initially began peacefully but later deteriorated into frequent disputes. 

She said her husband not only stopped providing financial support for her and their child but also directed abusive and offensive language toward her, both in person and via messages. 

She submitted screenshots of the alleged messages as evidence, insisting that their relationship had become unbearable.

The wife sought a divorce for harm, alimony, child support, housing and domestic help expenses, as well as coverage for her child’s school fees and transportation costs. 

However, the court of first instance dismissed her request for divorce, citing insufficient evidence. It did, however, order the husband to pay Dh1,000 per month for the child’s living, clothing, housing, and medical expenses, along with Dh500 in monthly transport costs and tuition fees.

Unwilling to accept the ruling, the woman appealed, arguing that the abusive messages were sufficient grounds for divorce. 

The appellate court rejected the appeal, ruling that the electronic messages alone could not serve as reliable evidence without corroborating witnesses or official reports. 

It noted that digital correspondence cannot be considered conclusive proof in personal status cases unless supported by additional material evidence.

The court emphasized that marital disputes and fleeting verbal insults do not constitute severe harm warranting divorce, especially when children are involved. 

“Separation between spouses is only granted when the harm is proven to be real and substantial, making marital life impossible to sustain,” the judgment stated.

The ruling upheld the lower court’s decision, maintaining the existing custody arrangement and ordering the husband to continue paying child expenses, while denying the wife’s request for divorce and other financial claims.