Oxford Brookes University lecturer Khaled Hayatleh battles wife Reem Mofdy in court after she 'tried to run him over'

Oxford Brookes University lecturer Khaled Hayatleh, 50, says he decided to end his relationship with Reem Mofdy after she punched him and 'attempted to run him over' in her red convertible BMW, because she suspected he had been cheating on her.

Ms Mofdy, 37, received a criminal conviction in relation to the attack, and the couple each filed to divorce the other in 2013.

They have already clashed in court over the financial fallout of their split, with Mr Hayatleh asking a divorce judge to rule that a £1m house in Oxford, which he owned prior to meeting his ex, should not be put in the pot when their assets are divided.

But Mr Hayatleh is now going further and asked the Court of Appeal to rule that the pair were in fact never validly married in the first place.

Ms Mofdy insists that they are legally husband and wife, and accuses her ex of 'seeking to avoid his financial responsibilities to her arising out of their marriage'.

Mr Hayatleh lectures in electronic engineering at Oxford Brookes, having moved to the UK from Syria in the 1980s and acquired British citizenship.

The pair went through an arranged 'religious marriage' in Syria in 1999 - which Mr Hayatleh himself did not attend.

He instead sent his brother to stand in for him, a valid and legal move under Syrian law.

Ms Mofdy moved to Oxford the same year and they went through another ceremony, this time face to face at Exeter Hall in Kidlington.

They spent 14 years together, during which they had a daughter, before their relationship fell apart in the aftermath of her conviction in 2012.

Oxford Crown Court was told by prosecution lawyers that she drove the car at him and punched him in the side of the face after accusing him of infidelity.

The attack took place outside their then family home in The Phelps, Kidlington, on March 25, 2012.

Ms Mofdy initially faced a charge of dangerous driving, but that was dropped by the prosecution after she pleaded guilty to common assault.

She was handed a two-year conditional discharge.

In the aftermath of the attack, husband and wife both filed divorce papers and clashed during a dispute resolution hearing over whether the husband's £1m house in Cavendish Road had to be shared with his ex. A court hearing is still pending on that issue.

Mr Hayatleh then asked the divorce courts to declare that his marriage to Ms Mofdy had never been properly registered and therefore was a 'non-marriage' in the eyes of the law.

But Judge Robin Tolson QC disappointed him, by declaring that the marriage valid in May last year.

Now the husband is asking Lords Justice McFarlane, Underhill and Briggs to overturn that ruling at the Court of Appeal.

His counsel, Nick Goodwin QC, told the court that Mr Hayatleh had decided to end his relationship with Ms Mofdy 'due to a number of incidents in which the wife was violent towards the husband, including an attempt to run him over'.

The barrister claimed that their religious marriage in Syria had not been properly registered and argued it should not be viewed as valid by the English courts.

He said Syrian documents had been traced 'which record Mr Hayatleh as being single'.

The QC went on: "He contends that the expert evidence has clearly established that the parties' religious marriage had not been properly registered and was not valid.

"There was no evidence of any application having ever been made to the Syrian court for registration. There were no authenticated supporting documents.

"The judge was wrong to find that the marriage was properly registered (and) should have held that this was therefore a 'non-marriage'."

William Tyzack, for Ms Mofdy, however, said that Judge Tolson's finding that they are legally married should stand.

He claimed that Mr Hayatleh may have ulterior motives for claiming they were never wed.

"It is suggested the husband's contest to the validity of the marriage, arising only after the financial dispute resolution hearing, brings into focus his strategic conduct in seeking to avoid his financial responsibilities to the wife arising out of the parties' marriage," he said.

"Judge Tolson found that there was a strong body of evidence pointing to the full validity of this marriage."

The barrister pointed out that Mr Hayatleh's non-attendence at his own wedding was 'an acceptable practice for marriage in Syria'.

"The marriage was an arranged one but there is no doubt that the marriage ceremony was intended as a binding and valid ceremony according to Syrian law," he added.

"They continued to live as man and wife for the next decade.

"There was in the whole of that time, no suggestion that they were anything other than a properly married couple.

"The parties' relationship broke down in 2012. In February 2013 the husband petitioned for divorce.

"Shortly afterwards, the wife cross-petitioned. It is common ground that at that stage the husband took no issue as to the validity of the marriage," said Mr Tyzack.

The Appeal Court judges reserved their decision on the case and will give their ruling at a later date.