Abu Dhabi Court of Cassation has rejected two petitions filed by a contracting company and an engineering consultant, and decided to uphold the appeal court's decision to fine them 10 million and 477 thousand dirhams, due to their failure in the construction of two schools resulting in the evacuation of the schools for fear of the safety of students after the emergence of large cracks in Walls and increased landing in the floors of rooms and internal and external courtyards of the two schools.
The case is due to the agreement of one of the government agencies, in agreement with a contracting company, to implement a contract for the construction of two schools worth 55 million dirhams, but the contracting company, the implementation of the project is flawed by implementing the foundations in a deep foundation and loading floor slabs on the soil directly without loading them on bridges or Awtad and other basic technical matters, this error has caused a fall in the floors and cracks in the walls and courtyards in the two schools so I carried out maintenance work for these defects more than once to no avail where continued to occur landing and cracks more, and then made an apology book Persistence in the implementation of maintenance work and it was not responsible for those defects based on what came the report of the soil laboratory, which hired him.
Details of the case indicated that the project consultant, "did not perform his supervisory duty and did not allow such mistakes to be made, and the company held the project contractor part of the responsibility for these defects, according to the report of the soil testing laboratory.
The government commissioned an engineering consultancy office to prepare a technical study and conduct the necessary technical tests related to landing and cracks. The latter submitted a report that concluded that the landing resulted from the presence of burial layers with a depth of 10 meters and floors were established on those layers and provided solutions to repair those defects up to 42 million. A committee was formed to receive the final project and the committee submitted its report that the project cannot be received in its current condition for final deficiencies, and due to the worsening of technical problems due to those defects, the beneficiary of the schools evacuated the schools for fear The safety of students after the emergence of large cracks in the walls and increased landing in the floors of rooms and internal and external courtyards of the two schools.
The government authority filed a lawsuit against the contracting company, and the latter filed a counterclaim requesting the reassignment of the expert committee to explain the compensation due to it for the damages caused by the delay in the implementation of the project and the losses incurred due to the increase in cost, high prices and wages of workers After the court filed its original and supplementary reports, the court ruled in the original lawsuit to oblige the contracting company to pay the government entity an amount of 42 million dirhams for damages and legal interest by 5% annually from the date of SIRO. And its final judgment until full payment, and in the case by refusing opposite, and spent the reasons for judgment to dismiss the case face (Consultant).
The government agency appealed this ruling as the contracting company, and after the court included the appeals, it rejected the appeal of the government entity, rejected and in the appeal of the contracting company, canceled the appealed judgment in the rejection of the lawsuit against the project consultant, and again rejudge the consultant in solidarity with the contracting company , To pay the sentenced amount of AED 42 million to the government entity, with the same interest and support it otherwise.
The contracting company challenged the judiciary by way of cassation, and the project consultant, "Consulting Office," challenged it in the same way. For the damage caused to the buildings of the two schools, which was limited to the first report and determine the percentage of the consultant's contribution in the preparation of designs and plans in the light of what was mentioned in the reasons for the judgment.
After the Committee filed its report, the Court ruled in the appeals to amend the appealed judgment to oblige the contracting company and the engineering consultant, to pay the government entity in solidarity amount of 10,477 thousand dirhams, instead of the amount previously judged, and the Office of Consulting Engineering in this judiciary by way of Petition to reconsider the petitions, as challenged by the same way the contracting company request to change, and the government party filed a memorandum of all petition request rejection.
We call upon the petitioners to rule on the contradiction in the operative part, stating that the consultant is the one who supervised the contractor's works in execution and allowed him to execute the ground floor in contravention of the designs previously prepared by himself, which he consented to modify the design and implementation, which was a direct cause. Happened from the demolition of buildings.
While the judgment in the petition indicated that the original, pursuant to article 187 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the judgments of the Court of Cassation shall not be challenged by any means of appeal, and may not be flawed in any way except those issued in the origin of the dispute. A petition requesting that the petition not be accepted and obliged each petitioner to pay the fees and expenses of the petition and ordered the confiscation of insurance in each petition.