A woman accuses her husband of stealing her new car
The Abu Dhabi Family Court and Civil and Administrative Claims rejected a lawsuit filed by a woman against her husband, accusing him of seizing her new vehicle, and refusing to return it to her.
In the details, a woman filed a lawsuit against her husband, in which she demanded that he be obligated to hand her over a 2021 Hyundai vehicle without damage, and to address the Traffic Department to transfer the ownership of the vehicle in her name, or oblige him to refund its value in the amount of 190,733 dirhams, and the legal interest at 12% of the amount claimed with Obligating the defendant to pay fees and expenses and in return for attorney’s fees, noting that she purchased the vehicle via the bank from her personal account in monthly installments of 3,496 dirhams. On a driver's license, she repeatedly asked him to transfer the ownership of the vehicle in her name, but he refused and kept procrastinating.
During the consideration of the case, the plaintiff submitted photocopies of the ownership of the vehicle in question, a vehicle purchase loan contract from a bank in the country, and a certificate of indebtedness issued by the same bank, while the defendant submitted a reply memorandum that included copies of transfer receipts in English and ownership of the vehicle.
For its part, the court clarified in the merits of its ruling that it is settled by the judiciary that the claimant of the fictitiousness must prove it, and that the authority of the trial court in interpreting the documents, declarations, agreements and contracts to show the intention of the contractors, noting that the plaintiff instituted her claim to demand the transfer of the ownership of the car from the name of the defendant, to the name of an institution Her requests are that she is the owner of the original vehicle and she has obtained financing to buy a car from the bank, and the vehicle has been registered in the name of the defendant because she did not have a UAE driving license, and she did not provide evidence to prove her claim and its validity.
The court indicated that the documents presented in the lawsuit and the submission of a financing request for the purchase of a car are not considered evidence of the lawsuit after the plaintiff was unable to prove its sham and did not prove ownership of the vehicle. her claim, establishing evidence for her, and supporting her in the claim is what proves her claim.
Regarding the plaintiff’s agent’s request to hear the testimony of the bank representative, the court indicated that in its reasons, the lawsuit was rejected, and then this request is not productive in the lawsuit, which must be rejected. The court decided to reject the lawsuit and obligated the plaintiff to pay fees and expenses.
Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news