Dubai: Shared cloud accounts, wireless headphones linked to phones, tracking devices, restaurant ordering apps, shared bank cards, and even app-connected vehicles provide data that may reveal spouses' movements, locations, and spending patterns, turning into ‘digital traps’ used by one party to verify a fact or test the accuracy of their partner's account, and potentially extending to evidence used in lawsuits.The paradox lies in the fact that some of this information is not accessed by one spouse surreptitiously, but is available to him/her with the knowledge and consent of his/her life partner, as a result of sharing an account, device, application, or digital access between them. What begins as facilitating family affairs, sharing services, or protecting possessions from loss may take a different course when doubt or discord arises, when one of the parties returns to what data the devices and applications have saved to verify the movements of the other, refute a narrative, or support a position.In one alimony dispute, a husband claimed he was financially unable to provide, while his digital transactions showed he spent money on various apps, games, and services.Lawyer and legal consultant Ahmed Al Zarouni said that technological development has created what can be described as ‘digital traps’ in some marital disputes, as devices and services that the couple use normally, such as shared cloud accounts, headphones linked to the phone, tracking devices, ordering applications, and shared cards, may turn into sources that reveal the location, movements, and spending of one of the parties, and then the resulting information becomes material that the other party relies on when a legal dispute occurs.Lawyer and legal consultant Ahmed Al Zarouni said that technological development has created what can be described as ‘digital traps’ in some marital disputes. Picture credit: SuppliedHe pointed out that the application or bank card used by the couple can leave information that goes beyond the value of the transaction itself, noting that the account holder may allow his spouse to view or use it, without expecting that the resulting data will be used later.According to Al Zarouni, the “digital archive” extends to financial capability, as purchases of games and services leave a record of spending that can be referred to later in alimony disputes, when a husband claims financial inability.For his part, legal advisor and lawyer, Muhammad Al-Awami Al-Mansouri, said that the legal issue in such incidents is mainly related to the method of accessing the digital information and the nature of the authority or permission granted, as accessing an account, phone or application through an authority granted by its owner with his knowledge and consent is different from accessing it surreptitiously.As for tracking devices, Al-Mansouri believes that they may be used to protect luggage from being lost, which necessitates distinguishing between placing them for a known purpose and using them to track a person without his knowledge.He stressed that granting the other spouse access to a phone, account, or application with their knowledge is different from accessing it surreptitiously, and that sharing these privileges does not necessarily mean opening the door to surveillance.Regarding the legal value of this data, he stated that its existence does not mean that it resolves the dispute on its own, but rather it can be relied upon within the information and evidence presented, while it is up to the court to assess its significance according to the circumstances of each case, with the need to differentiate between the digital event that can be proven to have occurred, and the interpretation or conclusion that one of the parties builds upon it.Aisha Al-Kindi, an international lecturer and trainer in leadership and community awareness, said that the rapid development in the use of digital technologies and services within the family imposes a higher level of awareness of the nature of the data left by devices and applications, especially since sharing accounts, devices, or passwords between spouses may begin as a normal matter based on trust and facilitating daily life, without realising the amount of information that this sharing can provide about location, movements, purchases, and other details.Aisha Al-Kindi, an international lecturer and trainer in leadership and community awareness. Picture credit: SuppliedShe argued that trust between spouses does not necessarily mean making every detail of digital life available to the other party.She pointed out that the transformation of shared services into a means of monitoring the other party when a dispute arises may increase the intensity of the tension, especially when one spouse begins to review purchases or usage history, as a single piece of digital information can become a source of greater conflict if it is interpreted out of context.She stressed the importance of building “family digital awareness” based on the couple’s knowledge of what sharing accounts, devices, and permissions means, clearly agreeing on the limits of their use, and not treating the availability of a password, site, or shared account as an open permission to monitor the other party at all times.
