Wife’s rights to ownership of property after divorce
Question:
May the peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be with you
I ask you a legal fatwa
My sister is divorced from her husband, and she lives in a European country
Her husband has four estates, two in two Arab countries
He had registered one of them nearly twenty years ago in her name at the real estate registry, but he wrote at the notary without her knowledge that this registration is conditional on her being kept married to him, and she does not know of this document.
The two properties in a European country are registered in their names both
He now says that she has no right to take anything from him because the first property he registered to her was under her pressure and he had written another document stipulating that she should be his wife to keep owning the property but again she did not know of this document
The fourth estate is in his name only, and there is no dispute between him and my sister over that
What is the Sharia ruling?
She wants the first property and half the value of the other two real estates, and does not demand anything from the fourth property
May Allah reward you
Answer:
In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
As-salāmu ʿalaykum wa-rahmatullāhi wa-barakātuh.
Your question is about ownership of gifted and shared property. Some general points will be mentioned first before addressing your question directly.
General Points:
In the Sharī`ah, gifting is the transferring of ownership from one to another for nothing in exchange.[1] Attempting to take back a gift is extremely disliked as the Prophet ﷺ said, “The one who takes back a gift is like the dog that vomits and then, swallows the vomit.”[2] If a husband gifts a house to his wife, it legally becomes hers.[3] She may do what she wants with it as she may with anything else she owns. This ownership continues through her life and afterwards is transferred to her estate. Once gifted, it cannot be taken back by her husband without another Sharī`ah-sanctiond transfer of ownership like a trade or a bequest, in which her agreement is stipulated.[4] If a person gives a gift in which he conditions ownership for a period of time, then transfer of ownership will take place and the condition will be nullified. In other words, the gift is accepted, but the condition of return is nullified. For example, if the gifter says, “I give this to you, but it will return to my possession at the time of your death,” ownership will transfer to the giftee and at the time of his death, it will not be returned, but rather inherited by his estate.[5] Similarly, if a husband gifts something to his wife with the condition of remaining in his marriage, transfer of ownership to the wife takes place with acceptance of the gift and the condition of return after divorce is nullified.
Joint ownership of a house is according to the understanding held by the couple. If the two assumed, whether explicitly or implicitly, equal ownership of the house, then half of it belongs to her and the other half to him. If there was a separate understanding, then the house will be divided according to it. If there was no clear understanding between them, it will be based on what their culture and legal system considers joint ownership of property.[6] In Western countries today, this is likely a 50/50 share of the house.
If one is pressured into gifting something, there is recourse to nullifying the gift and returning the object or its value. However, pressure is defined as a threat to life or limb by someone capable of instituting that threat.[7] It is highly unlikely a wife fits this description.
Case-Specific Points
The istiftā’ mentions three types of property disagreement:
- A house that was “registered” in the name of the wife. It is unclear what is meant by registered. Does this entail ownership, guardianship, or something else? There is a one-sided document of conditioning the registration on remaining in the marriage. If registration entails ownership, then this condition is invalid. If registration instead entails guardianship, then the condition is valid.
- Two houses registered in both their names. If this refers to joint ownership, then they share in the house, and it will be divided as stated above.
- A house that is solely in the husband’s name and presumably, his ownership. This house belongs to him alone.
Finally, keep in mind that Allah has given men some responsibilities concerning women. These will be asked about on the Day of Judgment. Withholding the rights of women is a trait of Jahiliyyah and among the worst oppressions a man can do. The Prophet ﷺ warned us during his last sermon, “Fear Allah concerning women! Indeed, you have taken them on the assurance of Allah.”[8] He ﷺ also made Allah a witness to this when he said, “O Allah, I have made inviolable the rights of the orphan and woman!”[9] How tragic would it be for a man if he withheld even a dollar from this paltry dunya and instead paid for it in the Hereafter? May Allah guide all the parties involved to an amicable resolution in which the rights of both parties are respected.
And Allah Ta’āla Knows Best
Mufti Faisal bin Abdul Hameed al-Mahmudi (S1)
[1] الجوهرة النيرة، المطبعة الخيرية، ج 1، ص 324
وَفِي الشَّرْعِ عِبَارَةٌ عَنْ تَمْلِيكِ الْأَعْيَانِ بِغَيْرِ عِوَضٍ
[2] صحيح البخاري، 2589
عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ ـ رضى الله عنهما ـ قَالَ قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم “ الْعَائِدُ فِي هِبَتِهِ كَالْكَلْبِ يَقِيءُ، ثُمَّ يَعُودُ فِي قَيْئِهِ ”
[3] بدائع الصنائع في ترتيب الشرائع, دار الكتب العلمية، ج 6, ص 115
(أَمَّا) قَوْلُهُ وَهَبْتُ لَكَ فَصَرِيحٌ فِي الْبَابِ وَقَوْلُهُ مَلَّكْتُكَ يُجْرَى مَجْرَى الصَّرِيحِ أَيْضًا لِأَنَّ تَمْلِيكَ الْعَيْنِ لِلْحَالِ مِنْ غَيْرِ عِوَضٍ هُوَ تَفْسِيرُ الْهِبَةِ وَكَذَا قَوْلُهُ جَعَلْتُ هَذَا الشَّيْءَ لَكَ وَقَوْلُهُ هُوَ لَكَ لِأَنَّ اللَّامَ الْمُضَافَ إلَى مَنْ هُوَ أَهْلٌ لِلْمِلْكِ لِلتَّمْلِيكِ فَكَانَ تَمْلِيكُ الْعَيْنِ فِي الْحَالِ مِنْ غَيْرِ عِوَضٍ وَهُوَ مَعْنَى الْهِبَةِ وَكَذَا قَوْلُهُ أَعْطَيْتُكَ لِأَنَّ الْعَطِيَّةَ الْمُضَافَةَ إلَى الْعَيْنِ فِي عُرْفِ النَّاسِ هُوَ تَمْلِيكُهَا لِلْحَالِ مِنْ غَيْرِ عِوَضٍ وَهَذَا مَعْنَى الْهِبَةِ
[4] مختصر القدوري، مكتبة بشرى، 420
وإن وهب هبة لذي رحم محرم منه فلا رجوع فيها وكذلك ما وهب أحد الزوجين لآخر (420)
[5] الجوهرة النيرة، المطبعة الخيرية، ج 1، ص 331
وَفِي الْيَنَابِيعِ صُورَةُ الْعُمْرَى أَنْ يَقُولَ جَعَلْت دَارِي هَذِهِ لَك عُمُرِي أَوْ جَعَلْتهَا لَك عُمُرَك أَوْ هِيَ لَك حَيَاتَك فَإِذَا مِتّ فَهِيَ رَدٌّ عَلَيَّ فَهَذِهِ الْأَلْفَاظُ كُلُّهَا هِبَةٌ وَهِيَ لَهُ وَلِوَرَثَتِهِ مِنْ بَعْدِهِ وَالشَّرْطُ بَاطِلٌ وَإِذَا كَانَتْ هِبَةً اُعْتُبِرَ فِيهَا مَا يُعْتَبَرُ فِي الْهِبَةِ وَيُبْطِلُهَا مَا يُبْطِلُ الْهِبَةَ قَوْلُهُ (وَالرُّقْبَى بَاطِلَةٌ عِنْدَ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ وَمُحَمَّدٍ) وَصُورَتُهَا أَرْقَبْتُك هَذِهِ الدَّارَ وَهِيَ مِنْ الْمُرَاقَبَةِ وَهِيَ الِانْتِظَارُ وَمَعْنَاهَا إنْ مِتّ قَبْلَك فَهِيَ لَك، وَإِنْ مِتّ قَبْلِي عَادَتْ إلَيَّ
بدائع الصنائع في ترتيب الشرائع, دار الكتب العلمية، ج 6, ص 116
(وَإِمَّا) إنْ كَانَ مَنْفَعَةً فَإِنْ كَانَ وَقْتًا بِأَنْ قَالَ أَعْمَرْتُك هَذِهِ الدَّارَ أَوْ صَرَّحَ فَقَالَ جَعَلْتُ هَذِهِ الدَّارَ لَك عُمْرَى أَوْ قَالَ جَعَلْتُهَا لَك عُمُرَكَ أَوْ قَالَ هِيَ لَك عُمُرَكَ أَوْ حَيَاتَكَ فَإِذَا مِتَّ أَنْتَ فَهِيَ رَدٌّ عَلَيَّ أَوْ قَالَ جَعَلْتُهَا عُمْرِي أَوْ حَيَاتِي فَإِذَا مِتَّ أَنَا فَهِيَ رَدٌّ عَلَى وَرَثَتِي فَهَذَا كُلُّهُ هِبَةٌ وَهِيَ لِلْمُعَمَّرِ لَهُ فِي حَيَاتِهِ وَلِوَرَثَتِهِ بَعْدَ وَفَاتِهِ وَالتَّوْقِيتُ بَاطِلٌ.
ثُمَّ قَوْلُهُ عُمْرَى تَوْقِيتُ التَّمْلِيكِ وَإِنَّهُ تَغْيِيرٌ لِمُقْتَضَى الْعَقْدِ وَكَذَا تَمْلِيكُ الْأَعْيَانِ لَا يَحْتَمِلُ التَّوْقِيتَ نَصًّا كَالْبَيْعِ فَكَانَ التَّوْقِيتُ تَصَرُّفًا مُخَالِفًا لِمُقْتَضَى الْعَقْدِ وَالشَّرْعِ فَبَطَلَ وَبَقِيَ الْعَقْدُ صَحِيحًا وَإِنْ كَانَتْ الْقَرِينَةُ شَرْطًا نَظَرَ إلَى الشَّرْطِ الْمَقْرُونِ فَإِنْ كَانَ مِمَّا يَمْنَعُ وُقُوعَ التَّصَرُّفِ تَمْلِيكًا لِلْحَالِ يَمْنَعُ صِحَّةَ الْهِبَةِ وَإِلَّا فَيَبْطُلُ الشَّرْطُ وَتَصِحُّ الْهِبَةُ
اللباب في شرح الكتاب، المكتبة العلمية، ج 2، ص 187
وهي (باطلة عند أبي حنيفة) ومحمد لأنه تعليق التمليك بالخطر
فتاوی دار العلوم زکریا، ج ۵، ص ۵۵۴، ۵۵۵
[6] الفروع الندية شرح القوائد الفقهية، دار المصطفى، ص 63
المعروف عرفا كالمشروط شرطا والثابت بالعرف كالثابت بدليل شرعي والمعروف بالعرف كالمشروط باللفط
[7] مختصر القدوري، مكتبة بشرى، 684
الإكراه يثبت حكمه إذا حصل ممن يقدر على إيقاع ما توعد به سلطانا كان أو لصا. وإذا أكره الرجل على بيع ماله أو على شراء سلعة أو على أن يقر لرجل بألف أو يؤاجر داره – وأكره على ذلك بالقتل أو بالضرب الشديد أو بالحبس المديد – فباع أو اشترى فهو بالخيار
[8] الصحيح لمسلم، 1218
فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ فِي النِّسَاءِ فَإِنَّكُمْ أَخَذْتُمُوهُنَّ بِأَمَانِ اللَّهِ
[9] سنن ابن ماجة، 3678
وروى عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ قَالَ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : ( اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أُحَرِّجُ حَقَّ الضَّعِيفَيْنِ: الْيَتِيمِ، وَالْمَرْأَةِ)
