What is the ruling when an oath is sworn concerning a person identified by both a proper name and a relational description (e.g., 'Sa'd, husband of Hind')?

Primary text

If an oath is sworn using both a proper name and a relational description (such as 'Sa'd, husband of Hind,' or 'the owner of this cloak'), the oath is deemed fulfilled (the swearer is held to have broken the oath, *hanith*) if the action sworn against is performed with the person identified by the proper name, even if the relational description changes or ceases to apply. This is because when the proper name and the description are combined, the proper name takes precedence, functioning as a specific designation of the individual.