Abu Dhabi Court rejected the case

A woman accuses her ex-husband of stealing 24 thousand dirhams from her wallet

The plaintiff said that her ex-husband stole the money from her purse during their marriage.

archival

A woman accused her ex-husband of seizing 24,000 dirhams from her purse during their marriage, noting that he returned 13,000 dirhams, leaving him 11,000 dirhams, while the Abu Dhabi Family and Civil and Administrative Claims Court rejected the case.

In the details, a woman filed a lawsuit against her ex-husband, in which she demanded to oblige him to pay her 11,000 dirhams, in addition to 3,000 dirhams in compensation and interest at 12%, and obligate him to pay fees, expenses, and fees, and in precaution, direct the decisive oath to the defendant on the basis that the defendant was her husband and was taken from her wallet. 24 thousand dirhams, and he returned 13,000 dirhams to her, and the remaining amount was not returned to her, while the defendant submitted a reply memorandum demanding the rejection of the case.

During the examination of the case, the supervising judge decided to direct the decisive oath to the defendant, so he swore to her in the form “I swear by Almighty God that I did not take the amount of 24 thousand dirhams from the plaintiff, and that I did not return the amount of 13 thousand dirhams from her, and that I did not undertake and did not commit to return the remaining amount of 11 thousand dirhams to her.” One thousand dirhams, and that I do not owe this amount to the plaintiff.”

For its part, the court clarified that it is legally established that each of the two litigants may, in any case of the lawsuit, direct the decisive oath to the other litigant, provided that the incident on which the oath is focused is related to the person to whom it was directed, even if it was impersonal, based on his mere knowledge of it. Taking the oath or renouncing her oath results in settling the dispute regarding the incident that was the subject of her, noting that the plaintiff, after having had evidence to prove the validity of what she claims and the defendant’s indebtedness to her in the aforementioned amount, she directed the decisive oath to him and took her oath after being directed to him by the supervising judge. According to the above-mentioned formula, what proves to the court that the plaintiff's allegation is incorrect or that the defendant does not owe her the amount in question.

The court rejected the plaintiff's request to obligate the defendant to pay her 3000 dirhams in compensation, due to the absence of the element of error on the defendant's side and the incorrectness of what the plaintiff alleges, which makes the request for compensation misplaced.

• The plaintiff demanded to compel her ex-husband to pay her 11,000 dirhams, in addition to 3,000 dirhams in compensation.

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