A man demands 156 thousand dirhams in housing rent from his ex-wife

The Abu Dhabi Family, Civil and Administrative Claims Court ruled to reject the lawsuit of a man who asked his ex-wife to return 156 thousand dirhams in total housing allowance that he paid over a period of 78 months, because she received a housing allowance from her employer.

In detail, a man filed a lawsuit against his ex-wife in which he demanded that she be obligated to return an amount of 156 thousand dirhams that she had received unlawfully for the rent of a nursery residence, for a period of six years and six months, as her employer rented a residence to her and her children, so this obligation is waived for He also demanded that she be obligated to pay fees and expenses and legal fees, pointing out that the defendant was his wife, and after their divorce, she was receiving, according to a ruling, a housing rent of 2,000 dirhams per month. It was discovered that her employer provided housing for her, and thus the defendant received a rent allowance of no She deserves a total amount of 156 thousand dirhams. He provided copies of the defendant’s employment contract, a copy of the identity cards of the parties and children, and a birth certificate as support for his claim.

During the consideration of the case, the defendant decided that the attached contract from the plaintiff did not include allocating housing to her, and that the contract showed her basic salary amounting to 8,400 dirhams and allowances of 5,600 dirhams, and that she was the one who spent on the children. She requested that the case be rejected for lack of validity and proof, and she submitted documents that the court reviewed. While the plaintiff submitted a request to include a new opponent in the lawsuit (the defendant’s employer), to submit the documents in its possession regarding her renting a residential apartment for the benefit of the defendant and her children.

For its part, the court explained in the merits of its ruling that the plaintiff based his claim on the fact that he was obligated, pursuant to a judicial ruling, to pay rent in exchange for housing, and the papers were devoid of any evidence that the competent court had withdrawn from obliging the plaintiff to pay housing rent since the date requested to oblige the defendant to return the amounts. during which it was sued, and then the lawsuit was filed without merit and requires rejection, and the plaintiff has the right to file a lawsuit before the competent court regarding the request to cancel his obligation to pay housing rent from the date he specified in his current claim statement, and the court ruled to accept the entry request in form and reject it in substance, and reject the case. As it is, the plaintiff was obligated to pay the costs and fees of the lawsuit.