Al Ain Court of First Instance rejected her claim

A mother asks her son to refund 40,000 dirhams for his education fees

The Al Ain Court of First Instance rejected a lawsuit filed by a woman of the nationality of an Arab country, in which she demanded that her son be obliged to return 40 thousand and 426 dirhams, which she had previously paid to him as tuition fees while he was enrolled in a private school.

In a lawsuit against her son, she said that she was the guardian of him according to an inheritance restriction, and she spent on him from her own money to teach him, and when he reached the age of majority, he must pay what she spent.

During the consideration of the case, the evidence witness (the son of the plaintiff and the brother of the defendant) confirmed that he had been managing the plaintiff’s accounts for the past five years, and that she had been doing associations to provide funds, and he had been paying school and university fees from those associations to his brothers, including the defendant. The latter, after reaching the age of adulthood, left the house and resided with their sister and demanded his money, while the defendant indicated that his "plaintiff" mother had no right to claim these sums, as she is obligated to spend on it as long as he is a minor, during which time she is demanding the sums in question.

While the court clarified in the merits of its judgment, published on the official website of the Abu Dhabi Judicial Department, that the court has established that it has access to the documents attached to the lawsuit, that the payment voucher, the payment is proven without paying it, and what was disbursed without the one who paid that amount, and that the defendant had A source of income from the salary of his deceased father, which the plaintiff controlled by spending it on him, noting that the plaintiff did not provide proof of the legal disposition that creates the obligation, so that the lawsuit in its current state became devoid of evidence capable of carrying it, but what was acknowledged in the exhibition of court sessions that it is obligated to pay In the necessities, and that the tuition fees that she paid were the result of her insistence on admitting him to a private school despite his superior being entitled to enter a government school, and the court ruled rejecting the case, and obligated the plaintiff to pay the case’s fees and attorney fees.

• The defendant has a source of income from the salary of his deceased father, which is controlled by his mother.

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