He got the money and refused to pay the installments

An employee asks the court to compel his relative to pay a bank loan

The family court rejected the case for not paying the expertise trust.

archival

The Abu Dhabi Court for Family and Civil and Administrative Claims rejected the lawsuit of an employee, whose relative demanded the payment of 104,977 dirhams, the value of a loan that the plaintiff had obtained for the benefit of the defendant, and the latter refused to commit to paying the installments.

The details of the case relate to an employee filing a lawsuit against his relative, who demanded that he pay him 104,977 dirhams, with the obligation to pay expenses, fees and attorneys’ fees, noting that his relative asked him in 2018 to obtain a loan for him from a bank, being (the plaintiff). In a government job that allows him to take the loan, and the defendant pledged to pay the installments of that loan, and in the event of not paying three installments, he pledged to pay the full installments with interest.

The plaintiff indicated that due to the existence of a family relationship between them, he did not take written evidence of his relative, and handed him the entire loan, amounting to 85,000 dirhams, and the bank card, in which there were 20,000 dirhams, pointing out that his relative paid eight installments, then stopped paying, which prompted him to establish his present claim, and attached copies of bank account statements and copies of other documents.

The judge decided to delegate an accounting expert, and instructed the plaintiff to pay the trust. In front of the case preparation department, the plaintiff decided that he could not pay the trust trust.

The court confirmed in the merits of the ruling that it is stipulated in the Evidence Law that if the trust is not deposited by the litigant charged with depositing it, nor by any other litigant, the expert is not obligated to perform the task entrusted to him. Cases Loss of the right of the litigant who did not pay the trust to adhere to the judgment or decision.

The court clarified that the decision in the first article of the Evidence Law is that the plaintiff must prove his right, and the defendant has the right to deny it, and the facts to be proven must be related to the case, productive in it, and acceptable, noting that the burden of proving the alleged right falls on the one who adheres to it. In civil matters, the judge’s position is negative, and he receives evidence of proof and denial without interfering in them, or drawing the litigants’ attention to the requirements of their defence.

The case court pointed out that it needed an accounting expert in accordance with the mission specified in the decision issued to delegate him, in order to fulfill the plaintiff’s requests, and the case papers and documents submitted by him were insufficient to decide on them in their case, which is why the case must be rejected in its case, and the court ruled that the plaintiff’s right to adhere to the decision of assignment experience, and by rejecting the case as it was, and obligating the plaintiff to pay the expenses and fees.

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