The "appeal" settled the dispute between the seller and the buyer

A driver commits a fine of 50 thousand dirhams before registering the car in his name

The Abu Dhabi Court of Appeal ruled, to cancel the judgment of the Court of First Instance, and the judgment again to transfer traffic violations of approximately 50 thousand dirhams to a person, for buying a car from the appellant and committing traffic offenses before transferring the vehicle in his name.

The details of the case are due to the fact that the owner of a vehicle filed a partial civil lawsuit in Abu Dhabi, demanding the ruling to transfer the traffic violations and transfer them to the name of the vehicle buyer, or to compel him to pay its value, which is estimated at 50 thousand dirhams, on the basis that the defendant bought the car from him provided that he pays the violations In addition to committing other violations of the car, which resulted in the ban on all (the plaintiff's) cars, because the aforementioned car is still registered in his name, and therefore he recovered it according to an order on a petition.

The court of first instance ruled that the case was not accepted, based on the fact that the car was registered with several violations, and that the papers were empty that the plaintiff had notified the competent authorities to conduct an investigation to indicate the perpetrator of the violations demanded to be transferred in the name of the defendant, and the court did not accept the plaintiff, so he appealed him demanding that the case be referred to investigation To hear witnesses to prove the appellee's possession of the car during the period required to transfer the offenses, and to judge the transfer of traffic offenses that the appellant made while in possession of the car, and to obey the judgment of wrongful application of the law, its interpretation and interpretation, and the lack of causation and corruption in the inference.

During the hearing of the case in the Court of Appeal, the appellant submitted a pledge document signed by the appellant stating that the car in question had become in his possession since the date of signing the pledge, in addition to issuing an order on a petition to circulate the car while it was in his possession as a result of committing violations. The appellant’s failure to transfer a license The car in his name so as not to pay off fines.

In its ruling, the Court of Appeal affirmed that the appellant filed his lawsuit demanding that the traffic violations of the vehicle subject of the lawsuit be transferred to the name of the appealed against, and he presented a copy of the pledge signed by both parties to the contract, and the agreement was proven that the second party - the appellant - shall pay the car violations, and if he did not The appellant represents him to pay the lawsuit with any payment or to challenge the pledge of allegiance attached to it, as it will be evidence against him and from the date of issuing this pledge he shall be bound by the violations made on it until the date of the appellant's return to the car.

The court ruled, accepting the appeal formally, and in the matter, canceling the appealed judgment and ruling again for transferring traffic offenses issued on the car shown in the papers to the name of the appellant from the date of the pledge date until the date of the return of the car to the appellant under the order on the petition contained in the lawsuit newspaper and obligating the appellant to pay the expenses of the two levels of litigation.

Follow our latest local and sports news, and the latest political and economic developments via Google news