Document Type : scientific

Authors

• Nematollah Firoozi ¹
• Mahdi kohansal ²
• shayan Raeis ¹
• Amirhossein Abolhasani ³

¹ Department of Theology and Islamic Studies, Faculty of Humanities, imamreza international university, Mashhad, Iran.

² Department of Law, Faculty of Humanities, , imamreza international university, Mashhad, Iran.

³ Department of Law, Faculty of Humanities, Imam Reza International University, Mashhad, Iran

Abstract

A critical dimension in adjudicating family disputes is the accurate understanding of the issue and issuing judgments accordingly. This study aims to answer the question: “To what extent and in what manner do judicial rulings on divorce align with the principles of Imamiyyah jurisprudence regarding instances of ʿusr wa-ḥaraj (hardship and harm)?” Using qualitative content analysis, the research examines 62 divorce rulings for women issued between 2019 and 2024. The findings indicate that although Article 1130 of the Civil Code establishes ʿusr wa-ḥaraj as the basis for judicial divorce, court practices largely confine themselves to traditional and materially provable grounds, such as failure to pay nafaqah (66%), physical violence (53%), the husband’s addiction (45%), and violation of stipulations within the marriage contract (31%). This approach is consistent with Imamiyyah jurisprudence, including Quranic teachings (Al-Baqarah: 233; An-Nisāʾ: 19), the jurisprudential principles of lā-ḥaraj and lā-ḍarar, and the narration “The believers are bound by their conditions.” In contrast, emerging psychological and gender-based grounds, such as severe depression and psychological abuse, have been independently accepted in less than 28% of cases. This narrow interpretation, despite the jurisprudential potential within the principles of “cohabitation with kindness” (maʿāsharat bi-l-maʿrūf) and the preservation of human dignity, diminishes the effectiveness of divorce rulings in genuinely alleviating women’s hardship. Consequently, based on identifying “ʿusr wa-ḥaraj as the axis of familial justice,” the research emphasizes the necessity of dynamic ijtihād (jurisprudential reasoning), unifying judicial precedents, and accepting psychiatric reports as independent evidence.

Keywords

• Judicial Rulings
• ʿUsr wa Ḥaraj (Undue Hardship)
• Imami Jurisprudence
• Family Justice
• Psychological Dimensions of Divorce
• Marital Stipulations
• Women’s Rights

Main Subjects

• Jurisprudence & Law