Divorce granted to wife on proven grounds of physical cruelty and insults causing mental harm.
Cyprus (CY)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe court granted a decree of divorce nisi to the petitioner-wife after she successfully proved the respondent-husband committed persistent physical cruelty and insults. Evidence corroborated by witnesses showed these acts caused significant mental and physical harm to the wife. The court ruled that such conduct satisfied the legal requirements for cruelty, justifying the dissolution of the marriage.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedMatrimonial Proceedings Children's Act 1958, s. 2; Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, s. 1(2): A decree of divorce may be granted where the respondent has committed physical cruelty or insults causing mental harm, constituting legal cruelty that the petitioner cannot be expected to endure.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedCited Case Law
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedFull text
[*10] 1983 May 11
(A. LOIZOU, J.)
MATRIMONIAL JURISDICTION
Carla Avghousti,
Petitioner,
v.
Renos Avghousti,
Respondent.
(Matrimonial Petition No. 8/83).
Matrimonial Causes - Divorce - Cruelty - Physical cruelty and insults - Legal cruelty.
A. Eftychiou, for the Petitioner.
Tr. Constantinides, for the Respondent.
JUDGMENT
The following judgment was delivered by:-
A. LOIZOU, J.: This is a wife's petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty. The respondent-husband was duly served and although he originally entered an appearance through counsel, he has instructed him to withdraw as he was no longer interested in defending the proceedings.
The parties were married on the 14th day of April, 1979, at Cape Coral, Florida and they came and resided in Cyprus soon afterwards. Out of this marriage there has “been one issue, a daughter, Frangesca Elena. born on the 26th May, 1982, now residing and in the care of the petitioner[*11]wife. Apparently there was no harmony in the relations of the parties as there has been evidence to the effect that there were repeated quarrels “between them. Two incidents which have been related by the petitioner were duly corroborated by the evidence of two witnesses, one of them Marios Pilarinos (P.W.2) who is a colleague of the respondent and a family friend and the other was witnessed “by the sister of the respondent and a friend of the petitioner. The cruelty consisted of physical force applied on the petitioner as well as insults. These incidents affected her mental health and surely her physical comfort if not her health; for that purpose she has seen a psychiatrist, Dr. Kamenos.
On the totality of the evidence before me which has not been contradicted and which I accept as true and correct, I find that the petitioner has proved her case of cruelty against the respondent by showing a persistent cruelty on the part of the respondent-husband on her who should not he asked to endure such conduct which is in no way excusable.
I need not now refer to the law applicable to the issues arising in this case as the question of legal cruelty has been dealt with extensively by this Court in a number of cases (see, inter alia, Peratikos v. Peratikos (1979) 1 C.L.R.341 ; Jabbour v. Jabbour (1981) 1 C.L.R. , p. 315; Joseph v. Joseph (1982) 1 C.L.R.95).
The facts as accepted satisfy the requirements of legal cruelty justifying the issue of a decree of divorce. [*12]
For all the above reasons a decree of divorce nisi is granted to the petitioner-wife on the ground of cruelty.
The question of the custody and maintenance of the child which lives now with her and the arrangements that have to he made for his care and upbringing will he considered under the provisions of section 2 of the Matrimonial Proceedings Children's Act 1958, together with the application for the making of this decree absolute.
Decree of divorce nisi is granted with costs against the respondent.
Decree nisi granted with costs.