{"issue_text":"Whether the marriage relationship has irretrievably broken down to such an extent that there are no prospects of restoration of a normal marriage relationship","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Parties not communicating, plaintiff in relationship with another woman, defendant locked out of home, plaintiff's family spurned reconciliation attempts"}
{"issue_text":"Who should be awarded custody of the minor child","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Plaintiff conceded custody to defendant in replication, defendant's cross-border trading, children's preferences"}
{"issue_text":"What maintenance should be awarded","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Plaintiff's earning capacity, defendant's needs, children's requirements"}
{"issue_text":"How should matrimonial property be divided","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"House purchase by plaintiff, defendant's indirect contributions, duration of marriage"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The plaintiff instituted divorce proceedings against the defendant. The parties married under customary law in 1991 and later solemnized under the Marriages Act in 1997. They have two children, one now a major. The plaintiff claimed the marriage had irretrievably broken down due to lack of communication and his relationship with another woman.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases