Khaberni - The Abu Dhabi Court for Family, Civil, and Administrative Cases ruled to obligate a man to return his friend’s car and pay for the value of traffic fines recorded on the vehicle during his possession. The court also ordered him to pay 2000 AED as compensation for the damages caused to the plaintiff, and stated that the decisive oath was used in adjudicating the defendant's claim that the car was a gift from the plaintiff.
In more detail, a man filed a legal case against his friend, demanding him to return and hand over a car valued at 135,000 AED, in the condition it was delivered to him, and to pay all the traffic fines from the time he took possession of the car starting from February 2025 until the actual delivery date, totaling 4020 AED, and any subsequent new fines. He was also required to pay compensation of 10,000 AED for the material and moral damage caused. The plaintiff indicated that he had lent his vehicle to the defendant for use only, but the latter refused to return it, committed traffic violations with it, misused it, and caused financial and emotional damage to him. The plaintiff included copies of the vehicle’s ownership and the fines issued against it in his claim documentation.
The defendant submitted a response memorandum arguing that the plaintiff had given him the vehicle as a gift or donation, and requested that the plaintiff be directed to swear the decisive oath with the words "I swear by Almighty God that I did not gift the car to the defendant nor did I offer it to him as a gift or a present, and the delivery of the car was neither a donation nor absolute ownership, and what the defendant claims is false and without foundation." The court decided, before adjudicating the matter, to direct the mentioned decisive oath to the plaintiff and he swore it accordingly.
The court explained in its rationale for the decision that the defendant requested the decisive oath be directed to the plaintiff, appealing to the latter's conscience. The court had complied with his request, the plaintiff attended and swore the oath, thereby resolving the issue of whether the vehicle was a gift.
Regarding the request for payment of fines, the court noted that the documents showed that the defendant had taken possession of the vehicle from February 2025, and he did not dispute or object to this date, which established evidence for his responsibility for the traffic violations that occurred during the period of his possession.
Regarding the request for compensation, the court affirmed that according to the law of civil transactions, any harm to others obligates the perpetrator to compensate, noting that the defendant's failure to return the vehicle (error) had caused damages to the plaintiff that were represented in the aspect of material damage (loss of earnings). The court obliged the defendant to deliver the vehicle to the plaintiff, if possible, in the condition it was in, and to pay the value of the fines from February 2025 until the actual delivery date of the vehicle, and to pay the plaintiff an amount of 2000 AED as compensation, as well as covering fees, expenses, and legal costs.
