The Court of Cassation in Abu Dhabi rejected two appeals against a ruling that denied their claim for a further charge of four million dirhams after being acquitted of a charge of threatening and insulting the defendant.
In the details, two persons filed suit against another claimant demanding a compensation of two million dirhams each for all material and moral damages caused to them by the defendant's lawsuit against them.
They said that "on the basis of a complaint and a malicious communication from the defendant against them, the prosecution assigned one of them to threaten the defendant with murder by firing a firearm at him and that they were the victim's spa." He had acquitted them of the charges against them.
"The defendant caused irreparable harm to them in the future: their imprisonment, their denial of normal life, and their reputation in the family, community and workplace."
The plaintiffs presented the penal judgment for their acquittal, which proved to have become unanswered, while the defendant was attended by his lawyer Ali al-Abbadi.
The first instance court dismissed the case, and the appellate court upheld it and appealed the decision.
The defendants said that "the criminal evidence report proved that no firearm or ammunition was seized, and the police investigation did not prove that the defendant was insulted or threatened, which gives rise to suspicion and uncertainty about what was attributed to them, which led to their acquittal of the charges against them. That he did not provide any evidence supporting the statement of the defendant as required by law and law ».
The Court of Cassation rejected this appeal, stating that "the plaintiffs failed to provide proof of the lie and the evidence, and they had the burden of proof as proof, and their case was based on the acquittal of their right, Proved, and did not have only to report them without evidence of another evidence ».
The court stated that if the criminal judgment was based on questioning of the evidence, the plaintiffs did not deny what was attributed to them, and the doubt was interpreted in their favor, as determined is not enough evidence of the lie and the author's claim, and if the judgment to reject the case on the bond of the undeclared The wrongful fault of the offender's responsibility, it shall be based on the grounds for which the particular one is given sufficient to carry it and the obituary shall be non-existent and the appeal shall therefore be refused.