A woman demands 200,000 dirhams from her brother... because of the "WhatsApp" message
The Al Ain Court of Appeal upheld a ruling rejecting the case of a woman who accused her brother of spoiling her relationship with her family.
The woman filed the lawsuit, demanding that the defendant (her brother) pay her 200,000 dirhams in compensation for the damages he caused her, noting that he offended her on the “family group” in the social networking program “WhatsApp”, and caused the severance of the connection between her and some members of the family. The family, and provided support for their claim, a copy of a phone conversation.
During the hearing of the case, the defendant decided that there was no harm to the plaintiff, and that her relationship with the rest of the family was still fine, and she went to visit them.
The Court of First Instance dismissed the case and obliged the plaintiff to pay the expenses.
The judgment was not accepted by the plaintiff, so she appealed it, and reproached the appealed judgment for violating the established documents, the error in applying the law, and the lack of reasoning, indicating that she had submitted written evidence, which is chats within the family’s “WhatsApp” group, which includes abuse of her, and incitement to it.
The respondent attributes to her incorrect facts that tarnish her reputation, and creates a kind of hatred for her on the part of her brothers, which resulted in their boycotting her, and whenever she was close to reconciliation with them, they were affected by the content of the respondent's conversation in those chats, which is considered a mistake by the respondent. Its physical and psychological damage.
The appellant submitted an answer memorandum, through which he sought the ruling to reject the appeal and uphold the appealed ruling, based on the lack of civil liability elements.
For its part, the Court of Appeal indicated that the Court of First Instance had dealt with the issue of the dispute in an exhaustive and accurate manner, and considered that “the evidence provided by the Appellant does not amount to proving the error in the right of the Respondent,” which the Court shares in a sentence and in detail.
The court added that “the content of the conversations on which the appellant relies in her lawsuit cannot embody the error necessitating civil liability and compensation in its legal sense,” explaining that “the allegation that the appellant influenced the appellant’s brothers, and made them boycott her, is a waste and robbing of the personality and capacity of the appellant’s family members to take action.” The decision they see fit, they are left alone to take whatever decisions they see freely, away from any external influence, even if its existence is true.
As for the appellant's claim that the respondent had previously addressed her in a previous case with offensive phrases that were not appropriate for her position, or directed insulting phrases to her affecting her person, she said that the correct field for claiming compensation for him - if he had a reason - is a case of abuse of the right to litigation. Or file a criminal complaint against him, if the conditions for that are met.
The court decided to accept the appeal in form, reject it in substance, uphold the appealed judgment, and oblige the appellant to pay fees and expenses.
Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news