Khaberni - The Abu Dhabi Commercial-Primary Court ruled to obligate a person to pay an insurance company an amount of 488,000 and 62 dirhams as compensation paid by it to the owner of a car insured with them, after the defendant stole it and expedited its relocation out of the country.
The court pointed out the proven responsibility of the defendant for the theft of the vehicle in accordance with the criminal ruling issued against him.
In detail, an insurance company filed a lawsuit against an individual, requesting he be obligated to compensate the plaintiff the amount of 488,000 and 62 dirhams, previously paid to the owner of the insured car, which the defendant was convicted of stealing according to criminal rulings, including interest at a rate of 12% from the date of the judicial claim until full repayment, and obligating him the court fees and expenses and attorney fees. The court noted that the owner of the insured vehicle had listed it for sale online, and was contacted by the defendant's wife, who requested to inspect it. The defendant took the vehicle for inspection but then fled with it and disposed of it, relocating it outside the country, which led the vehicle owner to file an insurance dispute against it. Subsequently, the disputes committee ruled to oblige the insurance company to pay the stolen vehicle’s value, which urged it to pursue a lawsuit against the defendant for the compensation it paid to the insured, as a result of the theft of his vehicle.
The court clarified in its judgment that, according to the Civil Transactions Law, the insurance company which insured the vehicle involved in the incident that resulted in damage could substitute for the owner secured with the sum it paid in compensation, and reclaim the compensation from the perpetrator of the fault that caused the damage. It noted that the criminal ruling's review showed a final judgment convicting the defendant of the vehicle theft insured by the plaintiff, which makes it imperative for the civil court to adhere to the ruling's res judicata. It was established from the case documents that the plaintiff had paid the vehicle value to the insured as evidenced by payment receipts, hence the court deduced the proven responsibility of the defendant for the theft of the vehicle and one of the scenarios warranting the plaintiff's recourse against the defendant, as legislatively stipulated, especially since the defendant failed to appear to defend against the claim or provide evidence absolving his liability of the claim amount.
Regarding the interest request, the court pointed out that as per the Commercial Transaction Law, if the demanded amount is determined on fixed bases and is not subject to sheer judicial discretion, even if the debtor disputes its entitlement or amount, the creditor is entitled to claim interest on it as compensation for the delay. The interest applies from the date the debt becomes due. Since the defendant's liability was engaged with the claim amount for the plaintiff company, a known sum, the delay in its payment was established, conditions that meet the eligibility for the plaintiff's delay interest as compensation for the delay and inconvenience.
The court ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff an amount of 488,000 and 62 dirhams and the statutory interest of 3% from the date of the claim until full payment, not to exceed the principal of the debt, and ordered him to pay the fees, expenses, and attorney fees.
