The accused is a child .. stealing a car and committing violations of 9,5 thousand dirhams

The Abu Dhabi Court for Family and Civil and Administrative Claims ruled that a man, “in his capacity as the natural guardian of his son,” is obligated to pay his neighbor 15,000 dirhams in compensation for his son stealing the plaintiff’s car, committing violations and causing its seizure.

A man filed a lawsuit against his neighbor, demanding that he pay him an amount of 35,000 dirhams and oblige him to pay fees and expenses, noting that the defendant’s son had illegally seized the plaintiff’s vehicle, and a criminal case was issued for it “the family and child prosecution” and the child was convicted for that incident. The son of the defendant who committed offenses against the car and that it was impounded, which resulted in material and moral damages. He supported his claim with photocopies of the police investigation report, a copy of the penal judgment, a certificate issued by the Family and Child Prosecution regarding the seizure of the vehicle, and a certificate of discharging the vehicle and handing it over to its owner.

During the consideration of the case, the plaintiff decided that his car, which was stolen by the defendant’s son, had not been damaged, except that he committed violations on it with a value of 1500 dirhams of radar, 6 thousand and 500 dirhams of parking, and 1500 dirhams of vehicle impounding fees due to violating the radar (LOCK) in addition to the damages he sustained. Physical and moral, represented in not using his car during the period of its theft and seizure, in addition to the psychological and moral damage he suffered and the loss he suffered.

While the court decided to suspend the case pending submission of evidence of the finality and imposition of the penal judgment, after which the plaintiff’s heirs submitted a request to expedite the case from the suspension and proceeding with it, accompanied by the death certificate of the plaintiff, a general power of attorney and a copy of the judgment issued by the Court of Appeal, and the brother of the deceased attended as an agent for the heirs.

For its part, the court made it clear in the merits of its ruling that it is evident from the papers and judicial rulings that the defendant’s son stole the plaintiff’s inheritor’s car, and the defendant’s father was present before the court. He did not deny that and he is the natural guardian of his son. Noting that this error is the reason for the damages to the plaintiffs, which makes the elements of responsibility of error and damage and a causal relationship are available in the right of the defendant's son. 

Concerning the request for material and moral compensation, the court confirmed that it would not be reprimanded if it ruled for a total compensation for the damages incurred by the aggrieved party when it clarified the elements of the damage, noting that what is established from the papers is that there was an error on the part of the defendant’s son, which resulted in material damages represented in depriving the plaintiffs’ inheritors of benefit From his car for the period of his seizure, as well as paying him an amount of 9,500 dirhams as the value of traffic violations, release of seizure and parking violations, as well as the grief and sorrow that befell him upon learning that the defendant’s son had stolen his car. thousand dirhams and obligated the defendant to pay fees and expenses.

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