The Court of Cassation overturned an appellate ruling in a commercial case based on the appeal of the Attorney General of the Emirate of Dubai, Counselor Issam Al Humaidan, in a lawsuit related to a legal dispute over the sale of a commercial establishment.
The details of the case, according to the Dubai Public Prosecution, are due to the fact that the second defendant, in his capacity as an agent for the first, offered for sale an individual institution specialized in building maintenance, and the plaintiff expressed his desire to purchase it, and the sale contract was concluded and registered with the notary in Dubai, and its content is the owner The sole proprietorship may sell and relinquish all of its contents and components to the plaintiff, provided that the selling party bears all obligations incurred by the establishment, including all including rents, wages, salaries, fees, taxes, fines, depreciation and all related expenses, until the date of the sale registration, except that the buyer did not obtain From the seller on the payment of those overdue obligations owed by the institution.
According to the lawsuit papers, when the buyer began the procedures for transferring the institution and publicizing the sale, the buyer was surprised by the accumulation of financial obligations, fees and fines on them, which made him unable to complete the stages of transferring and publicizing the ownership, and as a result it was impossible to complete the sale contract due to the seller’s breach of what is imposed on him in the contract, which led the buyer To file a lawsuit requesting the termination of the contract of sale of the sole proprietorship, which is registered with the notary public, and obligating the defendants to return the sum of 105 thousand dirhams.
In the first stage of the litigation, the Court of First Instance ruled that the sale contract in question be rescinded, and the defendants were obligated jointly to pay the amount referred to, and the defendants appealed this ruling, and the Court of Appeal overturned the primary ruling in what it had decided against the second defendant (the agent on behalf of the seller, owner of the institution ) in the sale contract, and to rule again by rejecting the case before it, and confirming everything else.
The first defendant (the seller, the owner of the sole proprietorship) submitted a request to the Public Prosecutor, to challenge the appeal ruling, as it is one of the provisions that the law does not allow litigants to appeal, given the value of the claim in question is less than the quorum set for appealing the cassation.
The request was studied by a Chief Public Prosecutor in the Civil Prosecution, Tariq Ahmed Al-Naqbi, and it was found that the appeal ruling included a violation of the law, and an error in its application, for violating the text of Articles (44) and (45) of the Commercial Transactions Law, which confirm that the obligation to initiate procedures for transferring the ownership of the institution Announcing the sale with the official authorities, by submitting an application under the disposal of the commercial registry, and publicizing the newspaper according to the law is the responsibility of the buyer (the plaintiff), not the seller, and that the buyer is charged with proving his claim, but he did not provide evidence of his carrying out the aforementioned obligation, and he did not The contract concluded between the parties to the lawsuit states otherwise.
It was also not found that there were any obligations on the institution during the period prior to the registration, and documenting the sale subject of the contract prevented the buyer from submitting an application for registration to the employee in charge of the commercial registry, and publishing the sale contract in accordance with the provisions of the law, and since the appeal judgment based its judgment on annulment The contract of sale of the sole proprietorship and the obligation of the seller (the owner of the establishment) to pay the amount of the claim to the plaintiff (the buyer), in contrast to the original commitment to the aforementioned, which is defective of the judgment and must be set aside.
After the request was presented to the Attorney General in Dubai, Counselor Issam Issa Al-Humaidan, he directed his approval, and the approving the appeal sheet of cassation on the appeal judgment in the interest of the law pursuant to Article 174 of the Civil Procedures Law, and the Court of Cassation ruled to overturn the appealed judgment for the reason contained in the appeal sheet, and by referring The case is referred to the Court of Appeal to decide again by a circuit composed of other judges.
• The appeal ruling included a violation of the law, and an error in the application of Articles “44” and “45” of the Commercial Transactions Law.