UAE Top Court Revives Businesswoman’s Dh3.8M Profit Claim Against Partner

The UAE’s Federal Supreme Court has overturned an appeal ruling that dismissed a businesswoman’s lawsuit against her partner, whom she accused of withholding her share of profits from a jointly owned company in which she holds a 51 per cent stake.

 

The top court directed that the case be sent back to the Court of Appeal for reconsideration.

 

According to court records, the claimant sought the appointment of a corporate expert to examine the company’s accounts and determine her alleged dues. She maintained that although she owns 51 per cent of the business, the defendant — who manages the company — withheld financial records and failed to distribute her share of profits.

 

In response, the partner and the company filed a counterclaim seeking the appointment of an expert to establish that the claimant had not paid her capital contribution and to assess losses allegedly incurred, including her share of those losses.

 

After consolidating the cases, the court appointed an accounting expert who submitted a report. The claimant later revised her demands, seeking joint and several payment of Dh3.82 million with 9 per cent annual interest, along with Dh200,000 in compensation from her partner.

 

The Court of First Instance dismissed the case as premature, and the Court of Appeal upheld that decision.

 

The businesswoman then challenged the ruling before the Federal Supreme Court, arguing that her right of defence had been compromised after the lower court disregarded the expert report for relying on unsound grounds. She also said the appellate court failed to address her request for the appointment of a new expert or expert panel under the Evidence Law in civil and commercial transactions.

 

The Federal Supreme Court accepted her appeal, citing Article 121 of Federal Decree-Law No. 35 of 2022 on Evidence in Civil and Commercial Transactions. The provision empowers courts, at any stage of proceedings and either on their own motion or at a party’s request, to order an expert to remedy deficiencies or to appoint additional experts, including for reassessment.

 

The court further reaffirmed established jurisprudence that any substantive defence capable of affecting the outcome of a case must be expressly addressed. Failure to do so renders a judgment deficient.

 

It found that the claimant had specifically requested the appointment of a new expert after the initial report was set aside, and that this constituted a substantive defence that could have altered the outcome. Because the Court of Appeal failed to address this request, the ruling was deemed flawed for insufficient reasoning and breach of defence rights.

 

The Supreme Court accordingly quashed the appeal judgment and remitted the case to the Court of Appeal without examining the remaining grounds of appeal.

 

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