A dispute between a man and his sisters over a “void power of attorney” and an illegal gift

The Dubai Civil Court ruled to invalidate a power of attorney and gifts issued by a father to his son during his illness, after it was proven that he had lost mental capacity at the time of the transaction, and that the son exploited the power of attorney to conclude transactions for his benefit, which included transferring ownership of two plots of land as a gift to himself.

In detail, four sisters of Arab nationality filed a lawsuit against their brother, demanding the invalidation of a comprehensive general power of attorney that their father had issued to him while he was in a state of health that did not allow him to do so, in addition to canceling all the actions that were made pursuant to it, most notably the transfer of ownership of two plots of land to himself.

The plaintiffs reported that their father suffered a series of serious health crises, which began with a stroke resulting from a blockage in the carotid artery, which led to him being paralyzed on the right side, unable to move, and needing constant care. They explained that his health condition later deteriorated as a result of a cerebral hemorrhage caused by high blood pressure, which directly affected his mental and cognitive abilities, according to medical reports issued by specialized treatment authorities.

According to the lawsuit papers, the father – during that period – issued a comprehensive general power of attorney for the benefit of his son (the defendant), which includes broad powers, including disposing of the sale for himself or others.

The plaintiffs added that their brother later took advantage of this power of attorney to conclude transactions, which included transferring ownership of two plots of land without compensation.

The case papers indicated that the plaintiffs had previously filed a lawsuit to quarantine their father, which ended with a court ruling appointing them as his guardians, a ruling that was upheld on appeal, thus strengthening his ineligibility during the disputed period in which the power of attorney was registered.

For his part, the brother (the defendant) insisted on rejecting the case, and argued that what was attributed to him was incorrect, stressing that the power of attorney issued to him by his father was done legally and correctly, and that he had completed all official procedures before the notary public.

He pointed out in his defense that the issuance of the comprehensive general power of attorney reflects an explicit will from his father to grant him the powers to act, including managing and disposing of his money, considering that this disposition cannot be appealed without conclusive evidence of loss of capacity at the time of its conclusion.

He also argued that his subsequent actions, including transferring ownership of some assets to himself, were carried out within the framework of the powers granted to him under the power of attorney, and without violating the law. He demanded that the case be dismissed because it was not based on a valid basis of fact or law, maintaining that it had not been proven that his father lacked awareness or legal capacity at the time of issuing the power of attorney or concluding the actions in question.

He continued in a memorandum submitted to the court that documenting the power of attorney before an official body is considered evidence of the integrity of the will at the time of signing, and that this authority may not be wasted except with strong evidence that proves incompetence.

After examining the submissions of both parties, the court decided to appoint a specialized tripartite medical committee, and the committee concluded in its report that the father suffers from a severe neurocognitive disorder resulting from a vascular disease, which has led to a deterioration in memory, attention, and the ability to think and make decisions.

The committee confirmed that this cognitive deterioration was present at the time of issuing the power of attorney, as well as when signing the donation contracts, and that the medical condition is directly due to the stroke to which he was exposed, and is not the result of the effect of therapeutic medications.

The court explained in its rationale that the validity of legal actions requires the presence of a conscious and sound will, and that the loss of awareness negates this element, which leads to the invalidity of the action.

She also stressed that documenting the power of attorney before a notary public does not prevent it from being appealed if it is proven that its source was incapacitated at the time of its conclusion, noting that assessing this is subject to the authority of the court in light of the evidence, especially medical reports.

The court concluded by ruling that the general power of attorney issued to the defendant was invalid, and that all of its legal effects were lacking, in addition to the invalidity of the actions taken pursuant to it, including the transfer of ownership of the two plots of land in question. The court also rejected the request to assign additional expertise, considering that the medical reports and documents submitted were sufficient to decide the case. It obligated the defendant to pay fees and expenses, in addition to 2,000 dirhams for legal fees, and rejected any other requests.