The Abu Dhabi Family, Civil and Administrative Claims Court ruled that a person previously convicted of fraud and fraud should be returned to a “philanthropist” woman 700,000 dirhams, which he obtained after he deceived her by running a “fake” charity to help the needy. The court also ruled that he should pay 50,000 to her. dirhams, in compensation for the material and moral damages she suffered. In detail, a woman filed a lawsuit against a man in which she demanded that he be obligated to pay her 700 thousand dirhams, the value of what was unlawfully seized, and that he be obligated to compensate her for material and moral damages in the amount of 500 thousand dirhams, and that he be obligated to pay a delay interest of 12%, noting that The defendant committed fraud and identified himself as one of those working in charitable work, and that he helps the poor, and asked her to send him the zakat money that she collected, so that he could spend it through a “fake” charity that he claimed to be managing, which prompted her to transfer the money to him, and then She agreed with the defendant to buy land and cars through him, but after he received the price, he did not make the purchase, and he delayed returning the amount, which cast doubt on his honesty and integrity. It became known to her that there were fraudulent cases against him and he had already been convicted, so she filed a report against him, and he was tried. He was convicted under a criminal ruling.
For its part, the court explained, in the merits of its ruling, that what is established in the criminal ruling issued in absentia against the accused (the defendant) on the charge of seizing for himself the money of the victim (the plaintiff) has convicted the defendant, and therefore the element of error has been met and proven conclusively. his right, noting that this error was the cause of damages to the plaintiff, and the illegal act on the basis of which the criminal lawsuit was filed was the same on the basis of which the civil lawsuit was filed. Therefore, the court is bound by proving the error and attributing it to its perpetrators, and is prohibited from contradicting it or repeating it. His research.
The court stated that, according to the provisions of the Civil Transactions Law, “no one is permitted to take another person’s money without a legitimate reason, and if he takes it, he must return it.” The evidence of the criminal ruling was that the defendant seized 700 thousand dirhams from the plaintiff, and then the court ruled to oblige the defendant to return it to the plaintiff. This amount.
Regarding the plaintiff’s request to oblige the defendant to pay her an amount of 500 thousand dirhams as material and moral compensation, the court pointed out that according to the provisions of the Civil Transactions Law, “every harm to another obligates its perpetrator, even if he is not distinguished, to guarantee the harm.” It was established that the defendant seized the plaintiff’s money, It resulted in material damages, represented by her being deprived of benefiting from the seized amount, and the resulting failure to benefit from the amount in other aspects of life, in addition to the grief, grief, and heartbreak that befell her. What the court believes is that compensation for the plaintiff for material damages The moral amount of 50 thousand dirhams is considered sufficient, and the court ruled to oblige the defendant to pay the plaintiff 750 thousand dirhams and obligated him to pay the fees and expenses of the lawsuit and attorney’s fees, and rejected all other requests.
#fraudster #seizes #thousand #dirhams #philanthropist
