Preface

178
1. Whether it took place on 22 nd /8/2005 by letter given to the brother of the
appellant?
2. And whether it was considered by the lower Court or not?
Based on the judgment of the lower Court the divorce took place at the
Court on the date 23 rd / 3/ 2011 because the respondent failed to prove before the
lower Court the divorce neither by witnesses nor by a copy of the divorce letter.
And when he was asked by the lower Court whether he has any interest in retaining
the marriage? He answered negatively by saying that: “I prefer to go hell than to
retain this woman in marriage” See p5 of the record. This according to Sharia
means divorce by indirect speech.
Which mean the words that are used for divorce are two types: the direct words
and indirect words. The direct word is through using the word “divorce”: and the
indirect words are any other words used to end a marriage. Based on this what the
husband said before lower that “I prefer go hell than to retain this woman in
marriage” automatically means divorce by indirect word of divorce according to
Maliki school of thought.
Having clarified this point I will come to the argument of the appellant
counsel who raised the following issues:
1. Issue of conducting reconciliation before ending the marriage.
2. Issue of long term marriage between the appellant and respondent.
3. Issue of joint ownership of property between the appellant and respondent to
build the house of respondent at Bakau