Khaberni - The Dubai Primary Civil Court has ruled that an Arab individual must pay $500,000, or its equivalent in dirhams (1.83 million dirhams), for the benefit of one of the companies, the value of two luxury watches from the brands «Patek Philippe» and «Rolex», which he had received from it under two sales contracts, and a signed acknowledgment of receiving an amount equivalent to the value of the watches, but he refrained from paying the amount, despite being amicably and legally demanded to do so.
According to the courts' perception, the details of the case go back to July 2024, when the plaintiff entered into an agreement with the defendant to sell two luxury wristwatches for a total value of $500,000, with payment due within a month.
The plaintiff stated that the defendant failed to meet his obligation, despite her repeated attempts for an amicable settlement, which forced her to resort to litigation.
The company submitted a portfolio of documents, including a copy of an informal document signed by the defendant, explicitly acknowledging receipt of the amount as a trust, in addition to two copies of the sales agreements for the watches, and photos from exchanged conversations on «WhatsApp» between the parties involved in the dispute.
While the legal representative of the plaintiff attended the court sessions, the defendant failed to appear, despite being legally notified, which the court considered as an in-person judgement against him.
In the reasoning of its judgement, the court affirmed that in contracts, according to civil transaction law, the contract is the law for the contracting parties, and each party must execute what the contract obligates them to do in good faith, pointing out that the deposit agreement imposes an obligation on the depositary to return the money in kind upon request. The court also noted that the informal document submitted by the plaintiff legally binds the defendant as long as he did not expressly deny it, and his absence from attending the hearings or presenting any defense or document proving compliance with his obligation reinforces the legitimacy of the plaintiff's claims.
The court consequently found that the defendant had indeed received the amount in dispute as a deposit and violated his legal obligation to return it, which requires obliging him to pay the full amount demanded.
Regarding the request for legal interest at a rate of 9%, the court saw no explicit agreement between the parties on this rate and applied what was settled by the «Dubai Cassation Court», ruling to oblige the defendant to a penalty interest rate of 5% annually, from the date of the legal demand until full payment.
On the other hand, the court rejected the plaintiff's request to oblige the defendant to pay legal fees, as it was established that the person who attended the argument was her legal representative and not a lawyer, as required by the civil procedures law in this regard.
