“Civil Cases” upheld the referral of the case to the Personal Status

A man asks his ex-wife to return the dowry and the costs of marriage equipment

The plaintiff claimed that he lent the defendant the amount of the claim, to be returned upon his request.

archival

The Abu Dhabi Family and Civil and Administrative Claims Court rejected the appeal of a man against his ex-wife, asking her to return 230,000 dirhams of her dowry and marriage supplies.

In the details, a man filed a lawsuit against a woman in which he demanded that she be obligated to pay an amount of 230,000 dirhams and interest 12% from the date of the claim until full payment, with obligating her to pay fees and expenses and in return for attorney’s fees, indicating that he lent the defendant the amount of the claim, provided that it would be returned by her upon his request. He took the initiative to transfer that amount through bank transfers in two payments, the first amounting to 130 thousand dirhams to her account in one of the banks, and the other amounting to 100 thousand dirhams to the same account.

While the defendant submitted a reply memorandum in which she argued that this court had no qualitative jurisdiction over the case and the jurisdiction of the personal status courts, and in precaution, the case was referred for investigation to hear her statements and witnesses. The note included a portfolio of documents including a marriage contract and birth certificate in English.

For its part, the court confirmed, in the merits of its ruling, that the plaintiff had instituted his claim to claim the money he transferred to the defendant’s bank account, but the latter had paid that claim that what was transferred to her was the dowry and the preparations for the marriage procedures, and submitted a document contract supporting her defense as an example of marriage contract.

The court indicated that it had authorized the plaintiff's attorney to comment with a time-limit of three days, but he did not initiate this, and then the family court is competent to consider the case, and the court decided to refer the case to one of the personal status departments and kept the determination of fees and expenses.

The judgment was not accepted by the appellant, so he appealed, with a statement, in which he requested to accept his appeal in form and in its substance to cancel the appealed judgment and to re-judgment him with his original requests, citing the appealed judgment, a violation of the evidence established by the documents and a violation of the right of defense, as the court of first instance refused to accept his defense memorandum despite his filing with it within the specified period, and attaching it Conversations with the “WhatsApp” application between them about transferring the claim amounts.

For its part, the Court of Appeals clarified that, by examining all the papers, the correctness of the conclusions reached by the Court of First Instance, taking into account what the appellee held, that the sums based on the action had been received by the appellant in return for the marriage arrangements of the appellant, were reinforced by what proved in the papers that they were transferred to her about two months before the date of the liberation Their marriage contract, as stated by the bank’s receipt for her transfer of 100,000 dirhams in her favour, and that the purpose of the transfer is a loan to support the family.

The court indicated that the appellant insisted on hearing its witnesses that the amount of the claim was in return for the preparations for the marriage, in addition to what she had submitted indicating that she had previously been established before him in a personal status case, which was decided on the date of her divorce from the appellant.

The court affirmed that what the Court of First Instance concluded for its judgment of the appellant’s lack of jurisdiction had agreed with its judgment that the reality and the law were true, as the appellant’s appeals were not valid, so his appeal lacked its support and made it worthy of rejection. about being stabbed.

• The defendant submitted a marriage contract to confirm that what was transferred was the dowry and the preparations for the marriage procedures.

• 230 thousand dirhams, the amount requested by the plaintiff from the defendant.

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