An Akure Customary Court in Ondo State has dissolved a 12-year marriage between Moradeke Babalola and her husband, Temitope Babalola, after finding that allegations of domestic violence against the respondent were proven and that the union had broken down irretrievably.

The court, presided over by A.S. Obademi, ruled that the marriage could no longer be sustained, noting that repeated efforts by both families to reconcile the couple had failed.

Moradeke, who filed the divorce petition, told the court that she married Temitope in December 2013 under Yoruba Native Law and Custom after all traditional rites were duly observed.

According to her, the relationship was cordial during their courtship, which lasted about a year, but her husband's attitude changed shortly after the wedding, resulting in recurring incidents of domestic violence.

She testified that the alleged abuse became unbearable, forcing her to leave the matrimonial home in June 2025. To support her claims, she tendered photographs from their traditional wedding ceremony as well as images of injuries she said were inflicted by her husband.

Throughout the proceedings, the respondent failed to appear before the court despite several adjournments. The court also noted that neither his lawyer nor members of his family showed up to defend the case.

In his judgment, Obademi held that the respondent had been given ample opportunity to present his side of the matter but repeatedly failed to do so.

Citing the legal principle established in Newswatch Communications Ltd. v. Attah (2006) 12 NWLR (Pt. 993) 144, the court maintained that a party who neglects the opportunity for a fair hearing cannot subsequently fault the court for proceeding with the case.

The court found that the petitioner had successfully established her allegations of domestic violence and that all reconciliation efforts had proved unsuccessful.

Obademi further observed that the couple had stopped living together for a considerable period and had no children from the marriage. He added that the respondent's persistent absence and apparent lack of interest in the proceedings underscored the fact that the marriage had collapsed beyond redemption.

Consequently, the court dissolved the union, stressing that the decision was necessary to protect the parties and ensure that neither remained trapped in an abusive and unwanted relationship.

"The court cannot compel parties to remain in a union that has broken down beyond repair," Obademi held, adding that the dissolution was in the interest of justice and the safety of those involved.