‌Context & Objective: Marriage [Nikah] in Islamic jurisprudence is a fundamental and binding contract that pursues crucial objectives such as affection, tranquility, and the continuation of lineage. While legitimate conjugal enjoyment is a primary objective, procreation is recognized as a critical function. However, achieving this goal is not always within the spouses' control. Spousal infertility introduces a fundamental conflict between the principle of the binding nature of the marriage contract and the legitimate expectations arising from it, raising complex questions regarding the possibility of contract annulment or judicial divorce. The legal dissolution of marriage typically occurs through divorce [Talaq], with annulment remaining a highly restricted institution predicated on specific, enumerated defects. The primary objective of this research is to elucidate the precise legal effect of spousal infertility on the right to marriage annulment and judicial divorce. Consequently, the central research question investigates how the infertility of one spouse impacts these dissolution rights within the framework of Islamic jurisprudence and the personal status laws of Iran and selected Islamic nations, while seeking to identify the underlying jurisprudential foundations driving these divergent legal perspectives.
 ‌Method & Approach: The paper utilizes a doctrinal method combined with a comparative approach to examine the subject matter across the jurisprudence of Islamic schools and statutory frameworks. The study traces the legal status of infertility within the personal status laws of Iran, Egypt, Algeria, and the United Arab Emirates. The structural approach first investigates the jurisprudential foundations of defects that justify annulment within both Shia and Sunni schools of Islamic law. Subsequently, the study analyzes the specific legal condition of infertility under two distinct scenarios: within an absolute marriage contract lacking specific conditions, and within a contract containing a stipulation for procreation. Finally, the methodology evaluates the legal viability of invoking the concept of severe hardship as a substantive basis for initiating a judicial divorce across the examined legal systems.
 ‌Findings: The findings reveal a stark divergence in the legal treatment of infertility based on the underlying jurisprudential school. Within Imami (Shia) jurisprudence, infertility is not independently categorized among the enumerated textual defects that justify fasḫ (annulment of a contract). In an absolute marriage contract, the inability to procreate does not obstruct conjugal enjoyment and therefore does not generate an independent right of annulment. Infertility yields an annulment right only if procreation was an explicit condition of the contract, thereby activating the legal option of contractual breach or misrepresentation. However, if infertility generates ʿusr wa ḥaraj (severe hardship making the continuation of marital life excessively difficult and unbearable), it can serve as a legitimate basis for ṭalāq-e qaḍāyī (judicial divorce). Conversely, legal systems influenced by Sunni jurisprudence exhibit a wider interpretive scope. By prioritizing the teleological purposes of marriage—specifically procreation—and invoking the principle of harm removal [La Zarar], systems such as those in Algeria and the United Arab Emirates permit marriage dissolution due to infertility under designated conditions. The primary catalyst for these contrasting legislative approaches is the foundational jurisprudential disagreement regarding the exact definition of a legal defect and the primary objectives of the marriage contract.
 ‌Conclusion: The distinct categorization of infertility—whether as a defect, a breach of a contractual stipulation, or a catalyst for severe hardship—produces profoundly different financial, procedural, and social consequences. Procedurally, annulment is fundamentally derived from a contractual defect, often reverting specific financial obligations, such as portions of the dowry, to their pre-contractual status. Judicial divorce, however, necessitates formal judicial intervention and preserves the wife's financial rights up to the point of dissolution. The study concludes that navigating the complexities of spousal infertility requires precise statutory provisions that explicitly situate severe, incurable infertility within the parameters of severe hardship. Furthermore, addressing this issue effectively requires the establishment of stringent legal guidelines for marital conditions, the implementation of standardized medical and psychological diagnostic criteria by experts, and the mandatory integration of pre-litigation counseling to alleviate the psychological burdens associated with infertility disputes before they reach judicial tribunals.