A girl pays 8,400 dirhams for a fake work visa

The Al Ain Court of Civil, Commercial and Administrative Claims ruled to oblige a young man to return to a girl the amount of 8,400 dirhams he obtained after promising her to obtain a work visa for her brother. However, he broke his promise and refrained from returning the amount. The court indicated that the defendant failed to prove the legal reason for his possession of the amount, or the expiration of the obligation for any reason of acquittal.

In the details, a girl filed a lawsuit against a young man, demanding that he be obligated to return to her the amount of 8,400 dirhams, and to charge him the fees and expenses of the lawsuit, noting that she agreed with the defendant to obtain a work visa for her brother in exchange for the amount of the claim, and she paid him the full amount, but he did not commit to completing the transaction, or returning the amount, and she provided support for her claim in the form of a bank transfer.

The defendant submitted a reply memorandum in which he denied the plaintiff’s claim that the communication between them was regarding residence work for her brother, and that he did not deny receiving sums of money from the plaintiff, but these amounts related to employment and visa transactions existing between the two parties, which are legitimate transactions and known to the plaintiff, and in no way related to a work visa for her brother or residence for a person close to her. At the conclusion of his defense memorandum, he demanded that the lawsuit be dismissed, while the plaintiff commented that she denies her relationship with the visas that the defendant claims to have completed, and she maintained that She requested that he be obliged to return the amount to her.

Before deciding on the matter, the court decided to direct the complementary oath to the plaintiff, which she swore in the form: “I swear to God Almighty that I delivered to the defendant an amount of 1,000 dirhams in cash, in addition to an amount of 7,400 dirhams in a bank transfer, in accordance with an agreement between us that he would complete a residence visa transaction for my brother. However, the defendant received the full amount and did not complete the transaction for me, and declined to return the amount, and his debt is still occupied for my benefit.” The amount of the claim, and God is a witness to what I say.”

The court explained in the merits of its ruling that what is established from the papers is that the defendant acknowledged that he received the amount of the claim in dispute, in exchange for completing transactions for the plaintiff, and this acknowledgment is considered a conclusive proof against him in what he admitted, and legally entails shifting the burden of proof to him to prove the reason for the legitimacy of his possession of the amount, or the expiration of the obligation for any reason of acquittal, and since the plaintiff denied her relationship with the completed transactions, and the defendant was unable to provide legally considered evidence that the amounts were in exchange for completing a required transaction, the court decided In accordance with its discretionary authority, it directs the complementary oath to the plaintiff to reinforce what was settled in her mind, and the latter swore it in the prescribed form, so the court was certain of the validity of her claim, and the defendant’s liability would be occupied by the amount claimed. The court ruled to oblige the defendant to pay the plaintiff an amount of 8,400 dirhams as stated in the reasons, and obligated him to pay the fees and expenses.