Does divorce occur with the statement: "It is forbidden and by divorce that you will come on such and such a date," given that the wife later became aware of impediments to travel?

The prohibition using the phrase "haram 'alayya" (forbidden to me) is among the ambiguous phrases, and it depends on the intention of the one swearing: - If he intended divorce, it is considered a divorce. If he intended ẓihār (a pre-Islamic form of divorce by likening one's wife to one's mother), it is considered ẓihār. If he intended an oath, it is an oath. - If he did not intend anything, the preponderant opinion is that it is an oath, and he must pay the expiation for an oath (kaffārat yamīn).

Regarding the questioner's situations: 1. If he intended divorce with the phrase "haram 'alayya": Two divorces have occurred, unless he intended the second phrase as an affirmation of the first, in which case it is one divorce. 2. If he intended ẓihār with the phrase "haram 'alayya": He is liable for both divorce and ẓihār. He can reconcile with his wife during her 'iddah (waiting period) without a new marriage contract, provided this is not the third divorce. He is not permitted to have sexual intercourse with her until he performs the expiation for ẓihār mentioned in Surat Al-Mujadilah (freeing a slave, or fasting for two consecutive months, or feeding sixty needy persons). The expiation is only binding upon returning to what was prohibited. 3. If he uttered the phrase of prohibition but did not intend anything by it: He is liable for both divorce and an oath.