A partial civil court in Ras al-Khaimah ruled that an Asian woman working as an intermediary to recruit maids must pay an Arab woman 7,970 dirhams, as a result of the escape of a maid she had brought for her, only 20 days after starting work for her, following a dispute as a result of the maid’s request to increase her salary 300 dirhams, to 1,500 dirhams. instead of 1200.
In detail, an Arab woman (the plaintiff) filed a lawsuit, in which she stated that she received the defendant (an Asian maid), and paid her full fees at 7,970 dirhams. 1500.
She pointed out that she contacted the defendant (the mediator) to return the maid and return the money she had paid as a result of bringing her in, but she was procrastinating, and the maid ran away from her home during the trial period, and it was found that she had moved from Ras Al Khaimah to another emirate.
She explained during her statements in court that the maid left the house due to a dispute over her salary, and that the agreement that was made between her and the defendant stipulated that the maid’s salary would be 1200 dirhams, while the maid was asking for an increase of 300 dirhams on the salary.
The defendant indicated, during the hearing of her statements in court via audio communication, that she did not have an office to bring in maids, and that she mediated to bring the maid to the plaintiff, and that the office responsible for the maid is located in another emirate, and she was not aware of the reason for the maid’s escape from work.
In its ruling, the court confirmed that the defendant received these amounts from the plaintiff, on the basis of an agreement between them to bring the maid, and to start her work with the plaintiff, except that her escape was due to a dispute between them about the salary, and the defendant did not return the maid according to what was agreed upon. Without executing the agreement, and enabling the plaintiff to benefit from the services of the maid.
She explained that the defendant’s breach of the implementation of the agreement concluded between them, allows the plaintiff the right to claim the refund of the amount of money she handed over to the defendant, as long as the maid did not continue her work.
She added that the Civil Transactions Law stipulates that all contracting parties must fulfill the obligations of the contract, and the plaintiff has the right to claim the refund of the sum of money she paid for the benefit of the defendant, as long as the plaintiff proves that she paid the sum of money to the plaintiff, and the latter did not prove that she implemented the agreement concluded between them.
She pointed out that the defendant admitted that she did not have an office to bring in maids, and accordingly the court, pursuant to the Civil Procedures Law, obligated the defendant to pay the plaintiff 7,970 dirhams, and obligated her to pay the costs and fees of the case.