A divorce appeal involving disputes over property, relationships with children from previous marriages, marital conduct and jealousy was dismissed after the husband died before the first-instance ruling became final.
The couple had married in a religious ceremony in 2007. Both had been married previously and had children from those marriages, while they had no children together.
They separated in 2022, when the woman left the marital home.
Two different accounts of the marriage
The case before the Family Court involved sharply different accounts of what had led to the breakdown of the marriage.
The husband claimed that his wife’s main objective was to gain control of his property and that her behaviour towards his children had played a major role in the breakdown of the relationship.
According to his testimony, she referred to his children as “fortune hunters” and told him they were not genuinely interested in him.
He linked her alleged behaviour towards his children to what he described as an attempt to gain control over his assets.
The husband also claimed that his wife called him “useless” and “incapable” and attempted to manipulate him.
He made further allegations concerning medication, claiming that his wife gave him psychiatric drugs and referring to “brainwashing”. These were allegations attributed to his testimony and were not findings made by the Court.
The first-instance court, however, assessed the evidence as a whole and found his testimony credible.
Dispute over £200,000
The case also involved a significant financial dispute.
The husband said that around a month after his wife left the marital home, she withdrew £200,000 without his knowledge from an overseas account.
According to his account, the money was transferred to an account in the woman’s name.
He said the account had been opened before he met his second wife and that he had deposited income from the sale of property he had acquired with his first, deceased wife.
The financial dispute formed part of his broader claim that property was a central factor in the conflict between them.
Wife described marriage as “injured”
The woman rejected her husband’s account and said she had not wanted the marriage to end.
She described the marriage as “injured” rather than “dead”, arguing that the problems had resulted mainly from her husband’s behaviour and what she described as his pathological jealousy.
Her daughter also referred to the husband’s alleged jealousy during proceedings.
A police officer gave evidence and produced a copy of a complaint the woman had made to police on May 19, 2022, the day she left the marital home.
Family Court accepted husband’s evidence
After assessing the evidence, the Family Court accepted the husband’s testimony as truthful and rejected the woman’s evidence as unreliable.
The court also found that her daughter’s testimony did not strengthen her case, while the police officer’s evidence was not considered helpful to her position.
The Family Court subsequently dissolved the marriage on the grounds of serious breakdown, finding that both spouses had contributed to the circumstances that led to it.
17 grounds of appeal
The woman appealed the decision on March 4, 2024, raising 17 grounds of appeal.
The grounds mainly concerned the Family Court’s assessment of the evidence and its decision to accept the husband’s account while rejecting hers.
However, a key development had occurred before the appeal was filed.
The husband had died on February 16, 2024, before the Family Court judgment had become final.
Death brought appeal to an end
The Court of Appeal considered the legal consequences of the husband’s death for the pending proceedings.
The woman argued that his death did not affect her right to appeal because she had filed the appeal within the applicable deadline.
The Court of Appeal took a different view.
Referring to relevant case law and legal commentary, it held that the right to divorce is strictly personal and that the death of one spouse before a divorce judgment becomes final automatically dissolves the marriage.
The court found that the marriage could no longer be the subject of divorce proceedings following the husband’s death and that the process could not continue through an heir, administrator or another person.
Because the husband died on February 16, 2024, before the deadline for an appeal had expired, the Family Court decision had not yet become final.
The marriage was therefore dissolved automatically by his death.
As a result, when the woman filed her appeal, it had effectively lost its subject matter.
The Court of Appeal therefore did not examine the 17 grounds of appeal or revisit the disputes over the property, children, jealousy or the conduct of either spouse.
The appeal was dismissed under Regulation 41.9(3) of the Civil Procedure Rules 2023 as “plainly unmeritorious” because it had lost its subject matter.
The court also awarded €2,400 in costs, plus VAT if applicable, in favour of the administrator of the deceased’s estate and against the appellant.
Also read: One injured in Limassol construction site stabbing
For more videos and updates, check out our YouTube channel
