Explaining the Legal Status of Husband’s Transactions due to the Intention of Marriage Portion Evasion

Wife’s ownership of marriage portion is established at the moment that the engagement recital is observed. It is noteworthy that the granted ownership over the half of marriage portion is firmly fixed and settled. Whereas, her ownership over the other half of marriage portion is precarious and she gains complete ownership in case of sexual intercourse. Marriage portion varies in different forms depending on the degree of credit validity, the criterion of determination, the determinant and the time of claiming. But this difference does not have any effect on regarding marriage portion as a debt since at the moment of observing the engagement recital, the marriage portion becomes the property of the woman. Therefore, it is obligatory for the husband to grant marriage portion. However, the decree of the incumbency of its granting depends on claiming. Accordingly, either its long-term duration or its non-determination at the time of marriage does not affect its existence as a debt. The a foresaid factors can only change the amount and the time of its claiming. Importantly, sometimes the husband intends to evade payment, therefore he carries out artificial or real transactions with others in order to represent his inability for affording marriage portion. This study highlights that from a legal- jurisprudential perspective what legal status seems reasonable for these transactions. There is disagreement among Jurists and lawyers on the validity of such transactions. But the result of the present study, which has been carried out based on a descriptiveanalytical method, relying on library resources, indicates that husband’s transactions with the intention of evading payment, whether real or artificial, due to the illegality the transaction intention, are invalid. However, the aforesaid invalidity in husband’s artificial of transactions can also be claimed due to the lack of real intention, as well.