Divorce procedure may change: some families will not be given a reconciliation period

In Uzbekistan, the procedure related to the dissolution of marriage may be further clarified. A draft law developed by the government proposes not to grant spouses a reconciliation period in cases where there are clear grounds for divorce.

If this change is adopted, the court will be able to make a decision not by automatically setting a reconciliation period in every divorce case, but by taking into account the situation in the family, the causes of the dispute, and the possibility of preserving the marriage.

Most importantly, this is not about speeding up divorce in all cases. It is proposed to introduce a separate procedure for situations where clear grounds exist and there is no longer any possibility of preserving the family.

What is the divorce process like in practice?

According to current legislation, if spouses have minor common children or if one of them does not agree to a divorce, the marriage is generally dissolved through the court.

Article 40 of the Family Code stipulates that the court may postpone the case and set a period of up to six months for the spouses to reconcile.

This norm aims to give parties time to reconsider their decision in situations where there is a possibility of preserving the family.

However, not all family disputes in life can be assessed in the same way.

In some cases, relations may be so severely damaged that the granted additional time will not change the situation.

The new draft law proposes a specific approach precisely for such situations.

In which cases may a period not be granted?

At the center of the proposal are situations where there are clear grounds for divorce.

That is, if the court determines that there is practically no possibility of preserving the marriage, that family relations are seriously broken, and that the circumstances of the case require a divorce, the possibility of not setting a specific period for reconciliation may arise.

There is an important aspect here: “not granting a period” does not mean “divorce is carried out automatically.”

The issue of marriage dissolution will still be considered in the manner established by legislation, and the court will provide a legal assessment of the circumstances of the case.

An important exception already exists in practice

A separate norm regarding the protection of victims of violence during the divorce process already exists.

According to the Family Code, at the request of a person who has suffered from domestic (family) violence, the court does not set a period for reconciliation. This norm was introduced into legislation in 2025.

Thus, the new proposal can be viewed as aimed at further clarifying approaches to marriage dissolution rather than creating an entirely new mechanism.

Why is this issue important?

The main purpose of the period granted for reconciliation is to save the family.

In judicial practice, when considering the issue of divorce, attention is also paid to whether there is a possibility of preserving the family. Circumstances such as the presence of children, the duration of the marriage, the relationship between the spouses, and the temporary nature of disagreements may be significant.

At the same time, requiring extra time for families where the possibility of reconciliation no longer exists in practice is also considered a separate legal issue.

From this perspective, the main idea of the proposal in the draft law is not to treat situations where there is an opportunity to preserve family relations and situations where the marriage has practically collapsed under the same procedure.

Will the reconciliation period be canceled?

It is still too early to draw such a conclusion.

Because we are talking about a draft law. Until the proposal is adopted and enters into force in the prescribed manner, the current rules will not change.

Under the current procedure, the court may grant a period of up to six months for reconciliation.

Therefore, the interpretation that “in Uzbekistan the reconciliation period in divorce will be completely canceled” is not entirely correct.

First of all, it is about giving the court the opportunity not to assign a reconciliation period when clear and justified grounds for divorce exist.

The balance between family and law

This is also the most important aspect of this change.

On the one hand, state policy is aimed at preserving the family and safeguarding marriages. On the other hand, there is the issue of not keeping individuals in prolonged legal uncertainty in situations where there is no objective possibility of continuing the marriage.

For this reason, the new proposal brings an important question to the public agenda as well:

When does the time given to preserve the family become an opportunity, and when does it become an unnecessary obstacle?

The draft law aims to define this boundary more clearly from a legal perspective.

In brief:

Thus, the discussion regarding the divorce procedure in Uzbekistan revolves not around simply “speeding up” the dissolution of marriage, but around the issue of in which cases an attempt should be made to reconcile the family, and in which cases this process should not be dragged out.

If the proposal is adopted as a law, important changes may appear in the practice of reviewing divorce cases in courts.