Abu Dhabi: The Abu Dhabi Family, Civil and Administrative Court has ordered a young man to pay another man Dh133,000, the outstanding amount he received from him on the pretext of investing it in the gold trade. The court also awarded the plaintiff Dh5,000 in compensation for material and moral damages.
The case was filed by a young man who demanded repayment of the money owed to him, as well as compensation for the material and psychological harm he said he had suffered.
According to the plaintiff, he agreed to deposit a sum of money with the defendant to invest in the gold trade, on the condition that it would be returned after six or seven months. The two later agreed that the amount would be repaid in monthly instalments of up to Dh5,000.
The plaintiff said he transferred a total of Dh219,500 to the defendant’s bank accounts. The defendant repaid part of the money but later stopped making payments and refused to return the outstanding amount, despite being given a grace period of nearly two years and attempts to resolve the dispute amicably.
The defendant was criminally convicted and fined Dh10,000.
In the civil case, the defendant denied both the debt and the alleged gold investment arrangement, pointing to the existence of other financial transfers between the parties. He asked for the case to be dismissed and sought compensation. Alternatively, he requested the appointment of an accounting expert to settle the accounts between them.
During proceedings, both parties submitted statements relating to the transfers and payments made. The plaintiff maintained that the defendant had repaid Dh86,500 including Dh22,500 by cheque, leaving an outstanding balance of Dh133,000.
The defendant continued to deny the claim, arguing that the financial dealings between the parties involved multiple transfers unrelated to any investment in gold.
In its reasoning, the court explained that a criminal judgment is binding on the civil court on matters it has definitively determined, including the occurrence of the act forming the common basis of both cases, its legal characterisation and its attribution to the person responsible.
The court found that the defendant’s denial of the investment relationship and his assertion that other financial transfers had taken place were not supported by evidence sufficient to alter the outcome of the case or establish that the outstanding amount had been repaid.
Based on the case documents and after taking into account the amounts previously paid, the court found that the defendant still owed the plaintiff Dh133,000.
On compensation, the court found that the defendant’s wrongdoing, as established by the criminal judgment, had deprived the plaintiff of the use of his money and the opportunity to profit from it, in addition to causing emotional harm that warranted compensation.
However, the court rejected the plaintiff’s separate claim for compensation for psychological damages because he had not provided sufficient evidence to establish such harm independently.
The court ordered the defendant to pay Dh133,000 on the original claim, along with Dh5,000 in compensation and the court fees and expenses. All other claims were rejected.