The court ordered her to pay 20,000 dirhams in compensation for moral damage

Compensation for a former National Assembly member who was insulted by a girl on social media

The Ras al-Khaimah Civil Court ruled to oblige a girl (Gulf Arab) to pay a former national council member 20,000 dirhams, for the moral damage he sustained as a result of insulting him through social networking sites, and making him the subject of punishment and contempt from others, because of the performance of his work as a former employee in the The Federal National Council, and obligated it to pay expenses and attorneys' fees.

In detail, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit in which he stated that the defendant had been assigned incorrect facts that would demean and ridicule him, and degrade his prestige, as he is a former member of the Federal National Council and a well-known public figure. An insult to his honor and reputation, and harm to his children and family, and he asked to oblige her to pay him 200,000 dirhams in compensation for material and moral damages.

In its ruling, a total civil court confirmed that the defendant had published an audio recording on social media (WhatsApp and Twitter) that included insults and abuse of the plaintiff, and that the penal verdict issued against her had become final, according to the ruling issued by the Court of Appeal and the appeal issued by the Federal Court. The Supreme Court, and with it, the court shall be bound by the authority of this penal judgment, in which it is a necessary chapter of proving the defendant’s mistake, and the causal link between the error committed by the defendant and the moral damage suffered by the plaintiff, which elements of tort responsibility have been achieved.

She explained that it remains only for the court to assess the compensation due to redress the damage incurred by the plaintiff, and as for his request for compensation for the material damage he sustained, it is decided by the judiciary that the ruling on compensation for the material damage is a breach of the financial interest of the injured person, and that the damage is verified if it has occurred Indeed, or its occurrence in the future is inevitable.

She pointed out that since the burden of proving the material damage is on the plaintiff, and this damage or the expenses he made and his financial interest were not proven, the court tends to reject the plaintiff’s request for material compensation, and that it is decided that moral damages include everything that harms a person in his honor and consideration, or Affects his emotion, feeling and feelings.

She stated that estimating the damage and determining compensation for it is one of the issues of reality in which the court is independent, as long as it clarifies the elements of the damage and the extent of the victim's entitlement to compensation, and the court has established that the defendant insulted the plaintiff, defamed him, and offended him through the words attributed to him and published via the information network. And that the court considers that the moral damage inflicted on the plaintiff is consistent from insulting, humiliating and prejudicing his character, and insulting him and his standing in the public, and with his family without regard to his social position.

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