Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 36

Summary: - A dispute between spouses over household effects. If either establishes evidence of their claim, judgment shall be rendered in their favor accordingly. If neither has evidence, what is suitable for women belongs to the wife upon her oath, what is suitable for men belongs to the husband upon his oath, and what is suitable for men and women belongs to the husband upon his oath. The reason for this: the house is the man's house. Article 73 of Law 51 of 1951. The oath taken by the wife is an oath specific to the effects of the matrimonial home. The Law of Evidence does not apply. The reason for this: the evidence is governed by a special law. - The judgment under appeal awarded the wife KWD 500 as the value of items belonging exclusively to women after she took the oath. A challenge directed at the evidence. A challenge with no object. Rule: The import of Article 73 of Law No. 51 of 1984 concerning Personal Status is that, if the spouses dispute matrimonial effects, namely everything brought by both spouses together or by either of them that is needed for use in the matrimonial home by either or both, and either establishes evidence of their claim, judgment shall be rendered accordingly. If neither has evidence, what is suitable exclusively for women shall be awarded to the wife upon her oath; what is suitable for men shall be awarded to the husband upon his oath; and what is suitable for men and women shall be awarded to the husband upon his oath, because the house is the man's house, and he has possession of it and its contents, and appearances support and attest in his favor, except for what belongs to women among items suitable for men and women according to prevailing custom. The oath taken by the wife in this respect is an oath specific to the effects of the matrimonial home where neither has evidence that resolves the dispute. The Law of Evidence does not apply in this regard so long as the evidence is governed by a special law. That being so, and since the judgment under appeal ordered the appellant to pay the respondent 500 dinars on the basis that the clothing, shoes and accessories claimed by the respondent and specified in the statement of claim were items belonging to women and that she had sworn an oath to her ownership of them after it had rejected her evidence, it reached a correct determination concerning them, and the challenge in this respect is without basis. Since that judgment did not base its determination on the respondent's evidence, what the appellant raises concerning it is directed at no part of the determination in the judgment under appeal and is therefore inadmissible.