his principal’s marriage to the aforementioned husband in the husband’s presence, after he had been granted the legally prescribed period of respite before the annulment. Is the annulment valid, and does the marriage end under these circumstances by virtue of the judge’s authorization of the agent to annul his principal’s marriage? Or is a judicial ruling confirming the validity of the annulment required?

He replied:

If the agent authorized to annul the marriage does so after the judge has empowered him to proceed, his annulment is valid. No subsequent judicial ruling confirming its validity is required according to the schools of Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, Ahmad, and others.

However, if the judge himself performs a disputed legal act, whether concluding or annulling a contract—such as concluding a marriage without a guardian or purchasing an item not present on behalf of an orphan—and the matter is then brought before another judge who does not consider that act valid, may the latter overturn it before a ruling has been issued confirming it? Or does the judge’s act itself constitute a judicial ruling? There are two views within the schools of al-Shāfiʿī and Ahmad.

Annulment on grounds of insolvency is permissible according to the schools of all three imams. Here, the judge is not himself annulling the marriage; rather, he authorizes the annulment and rules that it is permissible. This is comparable to his ruling that a man is entitled to an inheritance and authorizing him to dispose of it; or ruling that a man is a marriage guardian and authorizing him to conclude the marriage contract; or ruling that a purchaser is entitled to rescind a sale because of a defect or a similar reason. Thus, whenever a person has been adjudged entitled to conclude or annul a contract, his doing so is valid, without dispute in cases of this kind. The disagreement concerns only cases in which the judge himself concludes or annuls the contract. Nevertheless,