The Al Madam Court of First Instance has dismissed a father’s attempt to block his young daughter’s overseas travel, ruling that his own failure to surrender the child’s passport caused the travel permit to expire, making his objection legally invalid.
According to court findings, the dispute began when the court granted the child’s mother — the legal custodian — permission to travel with their four-year-old daughter to Jordan for six days under specific conditions. The mother was required to cover all travel expenses, while the father was instructed to hand over the child’s passport two days before departure and receive it back after their return to the United Arab Emirates.
The father later filed an objection seeking to revoke the travel order, arguing that the trip was unnecessary, interfered with his visitation rights, and lacked urgent medical justification. He also claimed he had not been properly consulted before the travel permit was issued.
However, the mother told the court that the trip never took place because the father repeatedly refused to provide the passport despite multiple attempts to enforce the order. She said his refusal led to the cancellation of travel arrangements and caused financial loss and emotional distress.
In its ruling, the Personal Status Circuit noted that the travel period had already lapsed by the time the objection was reviewed. The court emphasized that legal challenges must concern an active and existing matter, and a party cannot seek relief against an order whose execution was hindered by their own actions.
The court concluded that failure to comply with judicial instructions does not create legal rights for the non-compliant party nor revive an expired order. The father’s objection was therefore rejected, and he was ordered to pay court fees and expenses.
