FOR many women, leaving a marriage is not simply a decision to walk away from a relationship. It can mean leaving behind a home, financial security, social standing and years of unpaid work. For some, it can also mean entering a legal system in which the price of leaving depends on how their decision to leave is understood.

A woman who seeks to end her marriage because of cruelty by her husband is not necessarily asking for a favour. Instead, she is exercising a right given to her by law. Yet for years, the distinction between a wife’s different legal routes out of marriage has had very real consequences, particularly for her dower and other financial rights.

Recent developments in our family law jurisprudence suggest that courts are beginning to ask a more important question: should a woman have to pay an economic price simply because she has chosen to leave a marriage that has become unbearable? The answer, increasingly, is no.

The distinction between khula and dissolution under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, is central to this discussion. Khula is a woman’s right to seek release from a marriage without alleging fault on her husband’s part. Dissolution under the Act, however, is based on specified grounds such as cruelty, failure to maintain her, or a husband’s unlawful second marriage. The difference is not merely technical. It can affect a woman’s dower. Where a statutory ground is proved, her dower is........

© Dawn