Dubai Court Throws Out Bid to Erase Liability in Dh4.5M Transfer Dispute

A Dubai civil court has ruled that it has no jurisdiction to entertain a fresh civil lawsuit seeking to absolve a claimant of liability arising from a bank transfer of about Dh4.5 million, holding that the dispute had already been conclusively settled by a final court judgment.

 

The Dubai Court of First Instance said that repackaging an already decided dispute under a different legal description does not dilute the binding effect of a final ruling, nor does it permit renewed litigation once a matter has been definitively adjudicated.

 

The claimant sought a judicial declaration that he was no longer liable for €1.065 million transferred in 2016 from the account of one of the defendants to his own account at a local bank. He argued that the amount had been dealt with in earlier proceedings involving a separate commercial entity and also claimed compensation for alleged harm caused by repeated legal actions over the same debt.

 

The claimant said the transfer arose from a long-standing investment relationship involving the defendants’ late father and a jewellery trading company, in which substantial sums in dollars and euros were invested. As relations soured, the matter evolved into a protracted and multi-layered legal dispute.

 

Court records showed that the disputed transfers had already been examined in several civil and commercial cases. In particular, a partial commercial judgment ordered the claimant to repay €1.065 million, or its equivalent in UAE dirhams, together with legal interest. That ruling was upheld on appeal and later confirmed by the Court of Cassation, rendering it final and unchallengeable.

 

Despite this, the claimant returned to court years later seeking a declaration of “clearance of liability”, effectively attempting to reopen the same dispute through a different legal route.

 

In its reasoning, the court underscored that judgments acquiring the force of res judicata are binding on the issues they decide and cannot be revisited, even if new arguments, evidence or alternative legal characterisations are advanced, so long as the parties, subject matter and cause of action remain the same.

 

The court added that the true nature of a claim is determined by its substance rather than its wording. A request for “clearance of liability”, it said, was in essence directed at the same debt already confirmed by a final judgment. Once liability is conclusively established, the presumption of a clear financial position cannot be revived through fresh proceedings.

 

The court further noted that respect for final judgments is essential to legal certainty, the orderly administration of justice and the prevention of repetitive litigation over the same disputes.

 

On the compensation claim, the court found no legal fault capable of giving rise to civil liability, ruling that enforcing a right confirmed by a final judgment does not amount to wrongdoing and does not justify compensation.

 

The case was accordingly dismissed, with the claimant ordered to pay court fees and costs.

 

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.