«Al Ain Appeal» upheld the dismissal of the lawsuit

A woman demands the cancellation of a gift given by her husband to her harm

The Court of Appeal of Al Ain upheld a ruling of the Court of First Instance, which ruled to reject a lawsuit filed by a woman against her husband and her wife, in which she demanded the restitution and invalidity of a gift contract granted by the second defendant to the first defendant, and the court indicated that the donor is still alive, and with full capacity, and therefore he is the only one who could have raised the issue of returning and canceling the gift.

In the details, a woman filed a lawsuit against her husband and his first wife, demanding the judgment to return and nullify the gift contract and suspend its validity in the face of her, with the consequences of that, and delete it from the real estate registry, and oblige the competent authorities to re-register those properties in the name of the second defendant, and oblige the defendants to fees and expenses, noting that the second defendant gave the first defendant (his first wife) four properties, and this was with the intention of circumventing the provisions of inheritance and the Personal Status Law, which Prejudice to the rights of the plaintiff (his second wife).

For its part, the Court of Appeal clarified that the plea of circumvention of the provisions of inheritance and the principles of justice with this argument is counterproductive, as it is clear from the papers that the second respondent (the donor) had previously filed a lawsuit against the first respondent (the gifted to her), demanding the nullity and annulment of the gift contract subject of the lawsuit, because of the consequent comparison between wives and children, and the Court of Cassation concluded that «the gift is made by arrest... It shall be considered an impediment to recourse to the gift if the gift is from one of the spouses to the other."

The court pointed out that Appellant had registered the gift with the official authorities, and it was scheduled that the gift of the property is carried out by transferring its ownership from the name of the donor to the name of the gifted person in the real estate registry at the competent registration department, and the transfer of ownership is considered a judgmental receipt of the gift with the permission of the implicit donor, pointing out that Respondent at the time of the gift was married to Appellant alone, and therefore there is no place to adhere to the differentiation in the gift between wives, in addition to the fact that the impediments to revoking the gift are preceded by reasons The Court of Cassation then concluded that the gift was valid and enforceable, and the judgment after it became final has determined the validity and enforceability of the gift made in favor of the first respondent.

The court confirmed that the donor (the second respondent) is still alive and fully competent, he is the only one who could have raised the issue of returning the gift and canceling it, because the money is his money, and that money has not become after an estate, and therefore the appellant has no capacity to claim the return and invalidity of the gift in the presence and life of the owner and owner of the money, and the court ruled to accept the appeal in form, reject it in substance, uphold the appealed judgment, and oblige the appellant to pay the fees and expenses.