Insult and taunt the owner and manager of a company

A tweet on "Twitter" costs the Gulf 100 thousand dirhams

A tweet on the “Twitter” network cost a Gulf person 100,000 dirhams, which was decided by the Civil Court in Dubai in favor of the owner and manager of a contracting company. thousand dirhams in compensation, but the court estimated the appropriate amount of compensation.

The incident began when the accused agreed with the owner and manager of a contracting company to build a villa, and then commercial disputes erupted between the two parties, after the first resulted in an amount owed to the company that demanded payment and filed a commercial lawsuit against him when he refused.

The first victim in the investigations of the Public Prosecution in the criminal case said that the accused insulted and slandered him and his family members, in terms of fraud by the owner and manager of the company.

While the second victim stated that the accused intentionally offended him, insulted him with various words, including the fraudster, the loser and the thief, and defamed the company, which led to its financial and moral impact and caused it to lose projects after compromising its reputation.

The report of electronic evidence at the General Department of Criminal Evidence in Dubai Police confirmed the existence of the tweets in question, and all of its content revolves around defects in the company’s work inside the villa, accompanied by pictures and videos, and included sarcastic, insulting and slanderous phrases, and appended with a hashtag containing insults.

After considering the case by the Court of First Instance, which acquitted the accused, the two plaintiffs and the Public Prosecution appealed the judgment before the Court of Appeal, which overturned the judgment of the first instance and convicted him and fined him 3000 dirhams. It is easy with her to understand what is meant and to know the person who is the perpetrator of the crime.

In light of the fact that the court understood the content of the insulting or slanderous terms without effort or effort, it is not required to take direct evidence, and the Court of Cassation upheld the appeal ruling to transfer the litigation to the civil court.

The plaintiffs, in addition to the company, as a third plaintiff, demanded 10 million and 100 thousand dirhams as temporary compensation as a result of the damage and loss they suffered, while obligating the plaintiff to pay the attorney's fees and expenses.

For his part, the defendant demanded the non-acceptance of the lawsuit from the third plaintiff “the company” due to the lack of its character and interest, and the non-acceptance of the lawsuit as a form for the lack of its conditions, and its rejection of a subject matter because it was not based on a basis from the reality of the law.

After considering the lawsuit by the civil court, it ended with the acceptance of the first payment by the defendant related to the non-acceptance of the lawsuit by the third plaintiff, being of no capacity, because she was not a party to the penal lawsuit that included the owner and manager of the company.

While the court rejected the other two pleas by the defendant, confirming the acceptance of the lawsuit by the first and second plaintiffs in light of the issuance of a valid criminal judgment condemning the defendant, and according to the law, the civil court must abide by the penal ruling in the related cases, and refrain from re-examining them.

Hence, the defendant was proven to have the error element and the responsibility to compensate the plaintiffs for the damages they sustained as a result of this error, according to Article 292 of the Civil Transactions Law.

As for the plaintiffs’ request for compensation of 10 million and 100 thousand dirhams, the civil court concluded that they did not provide evidence of the elements of the material damage inflicted on them so that the court could estimate and evaluate this damage, and in light of the fact that the plaintiff is obliged to establish evidence of what he claims, and the court is not obligated to direct The litigants are subject to the requirements of their requests, as it rejects the request for compensation for material and future damages, and is satisfied with compensating them for what they have suffered in their feelings and honor, and an insult to their reputation and dignity.

• The “court” understood the content of the insulting or slanderous terms without any pretension or trouble.

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