Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 428

An obedience action and a recalcitrance action. Their difference from an action for judicial divorce on grounds of harm. The reason for this. The former is based on desertion and the wife’s breach of the duty of shared residence in her husband’s home, while the latter is based on the wife’s allegation that the husband has harmed her such that continued marital life between them is impossible. Its implication. A judgment rendered in them does not indicate the absence of grounds for separation. - Separation on grounds of harm. Its cases. Harm suffered by either spouse from remaining married, whether attributable to a material cause indicating injury by the other spouse through words or deeds, whenever such injury is established, or attributable to other causes of discord such as aversion or intense hatred, even if injury by the husband is not established. The reason for this. The impossibility of continued marital life between the spouses. - Harm warranting separation between the spouses. Its assessment. Is exclusively for the trial judge, by virtue of his authority to ascertain and understand the facts of the action and assess the evidence.