UAE court grants pilot father flexible visitation rights

The Abu Dhabi Court of Cassation overturned the rulings of both the Court of Appeals and the First Instance Court, which had severely restricted the visitation rights of a Belgian father, a pilot, to see his son due to his fluctuating work schedule.

The Supreme Court issued a final verdict granting the father visitation rights in accordance with his flight schedule, establishing a flexible custody plan that ensures his active role in the child's life.

This decision supports the principle of joint custody and aligns with the evolving family law system in the UAE.

The case dates back to an earlier dispute between the father and the child's Italian mother, who resides in the UAE, over the custody of their son, born in 2021.

On Dec.31, 2024, the Civil Family Court ruled in favour of granting the mother full weekly custody, limiting the father's visitation to only one hour, twice a month, at a designated centre.

The court said that its decision was based on the child's young age and the father's profession as a pilot, which involves frequent travel and extended absences from the country.

In February 2025, the Court of Appeals upheld the ruling, arguing that the father's work circumstances did not justify modifying the custody arrangement or granting more extensive visitation rights.

The father challenged both previous rulings before the Court of Cassation, which subsequently overturned the Appeals Court decision. The Court of Cassation mandated joint custody between the parents and ordered a flexible visitation schedule tailored to the father's work schedule.

The court also emphasised the need for the father to be informed of the child's study schedule in advance and for both parents to coordinate in good faith to organise custody periods during the father's days off.

The court stated that the essence of custody law is to ensure the involvement of both parents in raising the child and that neither parent should be excluded due to their profession, provided there are no legal grounds preventing it.

Dr Hassan Al Hayes, a legal consultant representing the father, stated that the child's best interests require frequent and meaningful interaction with both parents, not just token visits.

He added that the Court of Cassation had upheld justice for the father, deeming that limiting visitation to one hour twice a month does not meet the minimum standard for a normal relationship between a father and his son.

Al Hayes explained that the ruling took into account the child's psychological needs and modern developments in the concept of custody.

He emphasised that the father's profession as a pilot should not be used as a pretext to marginalise his parental role.