He demanded 22 thousand dirhams in compensation for material and moral damages

Khaleeji accuses his ex-wife of submitting malicious reports.. and the court rejects the case

Ras Al Khaimah Court affirmed that the defendant did not abuse the right of litigation.

archival

(Khaleeji) filed a lawsuit against his ex-wife, accusing her of submitting malicious reports against him and fabricating unfounded facts, including hitting his son during his visit to him because the child was in her custody and lived with her, which caused him bleeding and involuntary urination, and demanded that his ex-wife pay him 22 thousand dirhams in compensation for The material and moral damages incurred as a result of filing many cases and complaints against him, and the partial civil court in Ras Al Khaimah dismissed the case because it was not proven that the defendant had harmed the plaintiff because she had the right to practice litigation, and obliged the man to pay expenses and attorney's fees.

In detail, the man stated that the defendant opened malicious and false communications against him and fabricated unfounded facts and statements and relied on medical reports unrelated to reality, pointing out that she had filed a complaint against him at the police station and he was referred to the Public Prosecution on charges of hitting his foster son by her while he was seeing him. He caused him to urinate involuntarily and beat him until he bleeds. After investigations, the complaint was filed.

He explained that she had opened another complaint against him, accusing him of threatening his son and insulting him in inappropriate terms. After investigation, the case was referred to the Second Misdemeanor Court, and a judgment was issued acquitting him of the charges, pointing out that the purpose of these communications is to harm him, distort his relationship with his son, and keep him away from him, as it refused to implement the ruling. Seeing five times in a row, according to what is fixed by the records.

He added that due to the material and moral damages he suffered due to the large number of malicious reports, his frequent visits to police stations and the Public Prosecution, the confiscation of his passport, the disruption of his interests, and the distortion of his reputation and his relationship with his son, he is demanding that she pay him 22 thousand dirhams in compensation for material and moral damages.

The defendant confirmed, through the agency of a lawyer on her behalf, that a divorce took place between her and the plaintiff, and that her son is in her custody, and the plaintiff previously filed a complaint against her accusing her of negligence, and she was acquitted, pointing out that what is proven from the social support report is that the child does not want to go with his father because he was beaten and that she insists on that right Reporting is guaranteed by the law and the constitution and requested the case to be dismissed.

And according to a partial civil court ruling, it considers, after examining the case papers, that the two communications submitted by the defendant against the plaintiff are not considered arbitrary in the use of the right to litigation, which is a right guaranteed by the law and the constitution, as the court did not prove its intention to harm the plaintiff, or the presence of maliciousness and the untruth of the facts. Which I reported about, especially that the second communication that I submitted resulted in an accusation against the plaintiff, and that the acquittal ruling that was issued against him was based on the existence of differences between them and the court’s lack of approval of the statements of their child, as he is a minor.

She clarified that with regard to the first communication, it was preserved by the Public Prosecution because it was found from the research, the social support report, and the child’s statement that he was subjected to beatings. Accordingly, the court concludes that the defendant did not intend to harm the plaintiff and was arbitrary in exercising her right to report the facts, especially since in the criminal field the Public Prosecution has The court has the discretionary power to assess these facts and whether or not they amount to crimes.

She added that the verdicts of acquittal or preservation orders do not deduce from them the necessity that the defendant abused the notification or abused the right of litigation and harmed the plaintiff, but rather it falls within the framework of exercising the right to litigation with what the court considers that the case as it stands lacks evidence in the absence of proof of the defendant’s fault in terms of Damage to the plaintiff, and accordingly it decides to dismiss the lawsuit, keep its expenses on the plaintiff, and obligate him to attorney’s fees.

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