Maintenance in Iraq after the Personal Status Amendments: Spousal and Child Claims

Why did the August 2026 decision bring maintenance back into focus?

On 17 August 2026, the Federal Court of Cassation overturned a judgment dismissing a wife's maintenance claim under the Jaafari Code. Decision 16450 explained that the effect of marital non-compliance (nushuz) under Article 68 required a judgment ordering her to cease that conduct; the necessary judgment had not been established in the case file. The practical point is that an allegation in litigation does not replace the judicial document required by the rule. This was an application to particular facts, not a promise that every maintenance claim will succeed. [1]

Before discussing an amount, identify the person entitled, the period claimed and the applicable legal regime. Living apart, filing for divorce and obtaining a divorce judgment are different situations. A family may have several concurrent claims, but they should not be merged into an unexplained total or treated as a single entitlement.

First: which regime governs the case?

Law 1 of 2025 introduced rules for choosing Jaafari personal-status provisions. They include a choice made when a marriage is concluded and registered, and a conditional route for earlier contracts. Review therefore begins with the marriage contract, any application, instrument or judgment concerning that choice, and their dates. An assumed religious affiliation is insufficient, and it cannot be assumed that all cases continue to be governed by identical rules after the amendment. [2]

This article addresses the federal framework. Cases connected to the Kurdistan Region or involving a foreign element require separate consideration of applicable law and jurisdiction. A change in legal classification during existing proceedings also requires reading the actual orders in the case, rather than drawing conclusions from a social-media headline.

Second: spousal maintenance and waiting-period maintenance differ

Spousal maintenance concerns the continuing marital relationship and the conditions for entitlement. Waiting-period maintenance concerns the period following a divorce and its classification. Articles 91 and 93 of the Code distinguish revocable from irrevocable waiting periods, with a specific provision for a pregnant divorced wife in the circumstances stated in the text. Neither “every divorced woman receives identical maintenance” nor “divorce immediately extinguishes all maintenance” is an adequate legal explanation. [3]

A useful practical step is a chronology: the contract date, the alleged beginning of non-payment, documented payments, the claim date, and the divorce date and classification if a divorce occurred. Counsel can then distinguish past, continuing and waiting-period maintenance and examine the scope and time limits of each claim under the applicable regime. An existing award must be read together with its operative provisions and enforcement file. Its effect should not be assumed to have ended because of an event that has not been considered by the competent authority.

Third: child maintenance requires a separate inquiry

A wife's legal position should not simply be transferred to a child's claim. In Decision 163 of 13 July 2026, the Expanded Civil Panel determined that the Personal Status Court had jurisdiction over a university student's claim against his father for tuition fees. It relied on Article 59(2) of Law 188 and its provision concerning continued maintenance for a student, subject to its conditions. The decision identifies the competent court; it does not approve every tuition payment or course without examination. [4]

In a Code-governed case, Decision 16506 of 17 August 2026 overturned a judgment for failing to account for the son’s continuing status as a student, relying on Article 101. These applications under different regimes underline the need to identify the legal basis in each case; they do not make the conditions or claim periods automatically identical. [9]

For assessment of the amount, Decision 228 of 26 August 2025 stressed balancing the two children's needs against the father's financial resources and remitted the case for further assessment. No universal percentage for every household can be extracted from that judgment. Presenting housing, school, medical and daily expenses alongside evidence of income or resources permits a realistic discussion. An amount posted online about another family does not establish this family's needs. [5]

Fourth: interim relief, housing and enforcement

Decision 10281 of 21 July 2025 explained that interim maintenance under Article 31(1) of the Personal Status Law concerns the wife, rather than the children. This is an important procedural distinction: an urgent application should not be copied and extended to every family member without checking its legal basis. The substantive entitlement may have a route different from the particular interim mechanism in that provision. [6]

In Decision 13562 of 12 July 2026, addressing a case under Law 188, the Court also explained that housing is an element of maintenance under Article 24(2) and that the claim should be classified accordingly. This differs from the divorced wife's separate statutory housing right. After judgment, the Ur government portal lists a service for opening enforcement files for maintenance awards. Obtaining judgment and commencing enforcement are separate stages. [7][8]

Hypothetical example: three questions instead of an unclear demand

A married couple has stopped living together and has a school-age child. The wife says payments stopped; the husband says he sent cash. Before estimating any outcome, collect the documents concerning choice of regime and the payment records. Establish whether the marriage continues or a divorce has been formally established. Then distinguish the child's needs from the wife's personal claim. This example does not favour either account; it shows how “nothing is being paid” can become a set of dates, transactions and questions capable of investigation.

A practical preparation checklist

• A complete, legible marriage contract, the children's civil records, and documents concerning the choice of legal regime.

• Earlier judgments, recorded agreements, enforcement records and notices, if any.

• A monthly schedule of payments and expenses, with receipts or transfers preserved in their original form.

• Lawfully available documents concerning education, treatment, accommodation and income, without accessing another person's accounts without permission.

This is an organisational checklist, not a universal condition for bringing proceedings. Do not publish family documents or children's names in comments. Before signing a release, identify the entitlement, its holder and the period it addresses.

Frequently asked questions

Does leaving the home automatically end maintenance? That conclusion cannot be drawn automatically. The reason, evidence and applicable regime must be examined. The August 2026 decision confirmed the judgment requirement described above when applying Article 68. [1]

Is there a fixed amount for each child? The assessment decision requires examination of needs and resources; it does not establish a general tariff. [5]

Is an oral agreement that payments cover every entitlement sufficient? It is preferable to document each payment's purpose, beneficiary and covered period, and then examine the agreement's legal effect. Ambiguity makes reconciliation difficult and does not determine entitlement.

Educational material prepared from sources verified through 24 October 2026. Examples are hypothetical; the case file must be reviewed before applying these rules to an individual situation.