Man loses 5500,<> dirhams in fake coffee machine

Al Dhafra Court obligated the fraudster to pay 7000,<> dirhams to the plaintiff. Archival

Al Dhafra Court of First Instance ordered a fraudster to pay a man 7000,<> dirhams, who had defrauded him into selling him a coffee machine through a website, and obtained the money through a bank transfer.

In detail, a man filed a lawsuit against another person, in which he demanded that he be obliged to pay him 51 thousand dirhams as compensation for the material and moral damages that he suffered, while obliging him to pay fees and fees, noting that the defendant deluded him through the information network, and using a website, by selling him a used coffee machine for an amount of 10 thousand and 500 dirhams, where he was contacted through his phone number, and he transferred the amount of 5500 dirhams from his account to the defendant's account, and then discovered that he was exposed to a fraud, and Convicting the defendant under a penal judgment and fining him.

The defendant submitted a memorandum of reply, in which he maintained that the lawsuit was not accepted, because it was filed without the required formal conditions, and also insisted that it is not permissible to claim compensation exceeding the value of the damage, and demanded that the lawsuit be dismissed, for lack of validity and proof, and that the plaintiff be obliged to pay fees, expenses and fees.

In the reasoning of the ruling, the court stated that the defendant's plea of inadmissibility of the lawsuit was inadmissible because it was filed without the required formal conditions, noting that with regard to the civil lawsuit, the principle is that it is submitted to the civil court as it has general jurisdiction to hear and rule on it.

The court pointed out that it is clear in the papers that the error committed by the defendant in accordance with what is established in the penal judgment is the same error on the basis of which the plaintiff relied in filing the present lawsuit, and that the penal judgment has necessarily detailed the occurrence of the act constituting the common basis between the criminal and civil lawsuits, and the legal description of this act and its attribution to the perpetrator.

She pointed out that it was proven that there were material damages caused to the plaintiff due to the defendant's error, represented by the seizure of his money, and his failure to benefit from the amount since the date of the defendant's seizure, and the court ruled to oblige the defendant to pay the plaintiff 7000 dirhams, and oblige the defendant to pay the appropriate expenses and reject other requests.