Finally, the Federal Supreme Court referred a rental dispute between two companies to the Court of Appeal, as the leasing company requested the defendant to pay the amount of 7 million and 795 thousand dirhams, while the rental company demanded its right to an amount of 431 thousand dirhams.
A company that owns lands and a warehouse has filed a lawsuit with a leasing company with it, by requesting the ruling to cancel the rental agreements signed between the two parties and the amendment forms and their annexes, and to evict the defendant from the plots of land that are the subject of those agreements and obligate him to pay an amount of 7 million and 795 thousand dirhams and its interest 12% from the date of filing the lawsuit until payment The new rental fees and service fees up to the date of the actual evacuation.
The plaintiff stated that "the defendant violated the agreements, by constructing buildings on the leased lands without their approval and in contradiction with the design of the approved site, and renting parts of them to another company from the subcontractor, and did not pay the amounts due on it and monitor the claimed amount until the date of the lawsuit."
The defendant, on the other hand, filed a counter-claim against the plaintiff, with a request to compel her to pay the sums wrongly paid to her in the amount of 431,000 dirhams.
The court of first instance in the original lawsuit ruled to terminate the tenancy agreement the bill of claim and its amendment forms and appendices and vacate the lands subject of the lease agreements and obligate the defendant to pay the claimant an amount of 7 million and 579 thousand dirhams and its interest is 5% from the date of the claim until full payment, and in the counterclaim the obliging company claiming that She pays 367 thousand dirhams to her, and this decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
The Federal Supreme Court upheld the appeal of the leased company, stressing that if the subject matter court was subject to a ruling in the litigation between its parties, its ruling should include what the insured assured that it had examined all other evidence presented to it in the lawsuit, including the expert’s report, as well as all An adversary holds to him in order to be able to reach the reality in the lawsuit, so that the reasoning of the ruling with what you have written in his blogs leads to the result that you reached.
She pointed out that the ruling ended in his blogs, taking into account the report of the Experience Committee, who assured him that the leasing company prohibited the leased company from using the leased lands by refraining from renewing their work permit and closing their work system, and therefore the rental fees are due to this date mentioned, which requires the referral veto .