Abu Dhabi court orders man to return Dhs260,000 he borrowed from a woman
Abu Dhabi Family, Civil, and Administrative Cases Court has ordered a man to repay Dhs260,000 to a woman from whom he borrowed the amount but failed to repay it, repeatedly delaying settlement.
The woman filed a lawsuit demanding the man repay the Dhs260,000 loan, along with a 12% legal interest until full repayment.
She also sought Dhs16,000 for car installments he was supposed to pay but failed to, despite using the vehicle for four months.
The plaintiff stated that the appellee received Dhs260,000 from her, as evidenced by a debt acknowledgment for the loan.
Additionally, he took possession of her car, agreeing to pay Dhs4,005 in monthly installments for four months during which he used the vehicle.
During the hearing, the court administered an oath to the plaintiff, who swore she lent the appellee Dhs260,000, which he did not repay.
The court reviewed the evidence submitted by the plaintiff, including a promissory note proving the loan.
The appellee appeared in court but failed to provide evidence of repayment or dispute the authenticity of his signature on the promissory note.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
18 hours ago
- Gulf Today
Abu Dhabi court orders man to return Dhs260,000 he borrowed from a woman
Abu Dhabi Family, Civil, and Administrative Cases Court has ordered a man to repay Dhs260,000 to a woman from whom he borrowed the amount but failed to repay it, repeatedly delaying settlement. The woman filed a lawsuit demanding the man repay the Dhs260,000 loan, along with a 12% legal interest until full repayment. She also sought Dhs16,000 for car installments he was supposed to pay but failed to, despite using the vehicle for four months. The plaintiff stated that the appellee received Dhs260,000 from her, as evidenced by a debt acknowledgment for the loan. Additionally, he took possession of her car, agreeing to pay Dhs4,005 in monthly installments for four months during which he used the vehicle. During the hearing, the court administered an oath to the plaintiff, who swore she lent the appellee Dhs260,000, which he did not repay. The court reviewed the evidence submitted by the plaintiff, including a promissory note proving the loan. The appellee appeared in court but failed to provide evidence of repayment or dispute the authenticity of his signature on the promissory note.
Gulf Today
a day ago
- Gulf Today
Up to Dhs500,000 fine for firms circumventing Emiratisation targets: Ministry
The Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratisation (MoHRE) has announced that it will take three measures against companies found committing fake Emiratisation. The deadline for private sector companies with 50 or more employees to meet the first-half 2025 Emiratisation targets is coming June 30. Companies are required to achieve a minimum 1% growth in the number of Emiratis having skilled jobs compared to their total skilled workforce. MoHRE outlined the following penalties for companies practising fake Emiratisation as follows: Exclusion of falsely reported Emiratis from the company's calculated Emiratisation ratio, mandatory repayment of contributions for years in which the company falsely claimed to meet targets, and obligation to achieve actual targets missed due to fake Emiratisation. Fines for circumventing Emiratisation targets are decided by MoHRE as follows: First violation is Dhs100,000, second is Dhs300,000 and the third or any subsequent violations are Dhs500,000. Starting July 1, 2025, MoHRE will verify companies' compliance, including ensuring that hired Emiratis are registered with social insurance funds and that contributions are paid regularly. This aligns with the UAE's strategic vision to integrate Emiratis into the private sector workforce and combat fraudulent practices. Companies are urged to meet targets promptly to avoid penalties and support national employment goals. MoHRE expressed confidence in companies to achieve these goals, particularly through "Nafis" electronic platform. Exceptional performers in Emiratisation will be granted Partner Club membership, offering up to 80% discounts on MoHRE services and priority in government procurement systems. The ministry highlighted its digital field monitoring system, which has successfully identified 2,200 violating establishments since mid-2022 till April 2015, with legal actions taken against them. This system detects practices like fake Emiratisation or manipulation of targets. The Ministry provides multiple channels to report violations, including calling the call centre at 600590000, or through the Smart App and Official Website.
Gulf Today
2 days ago
- Gulf Today
Abu Dhabi court orders man to return Dhs400,000 debt he took from a woman
Abu Dhabi Family, Civil and Administrative Cases Court obligated a man to return Dhs400,000 to a woman, who had entrusted him with the sum in two promissory notes, but he failed to return the money and continued to stall. The court adjudicated the case by directing her to take a decisive oath, which she took in its prescribed form. Earlier, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant in which she requested that he be obligated to pay her Dhs400,000 in exchange for the value of the trust receipts detailed above plus a 5 per cent legal interest from the date of filing the lawsuit until full payment. The plaintiff pleaded that the defendant had received from her Dhs200,000 as evidenced by a trust receipt and another Dhs200,000 as evidenced by another trust receipt, adding that as he had not returned the amount to her and was procrastinating to do so, she was prompted to file the present lawsuit with the above requests. The plaintiff appeared in person before the court where she expressed her willingness to take the decisive oath and subsequently took the oath accordingly. As far as the plaintiff's request to obligate the defendant to pay her Dhs400,000 for the value of the trust receipts, the court explained that article 1 of the law of evidence in Civil and Commercial Transactions stipulates that the plaintiff bears the burden of proving their claim, while the defendant has the responsibility to disprove it. The facts presented as evidence must be relevant, impactful, and admissible. The court stated that the plaintiff filed her present lawsuit on the basis that the defendant received the money in question from her as a trust but refused to return it. As such, the plaintiff attached to her docket a copy of the trust receipt and the court completed this evidence by directing her to take the decisive oath, it added. On the other hand, the defendant neither presented valid evidence that he had returned the amount nor challenged the validity of his signature on the trust receipt. Based on the above, the court concluded that the plaintiff had delivered the amount in question to the defendant but the latter did not return the same to her.
