A bank grants a customer 96 thousand dirhams of credit facilities, but the judiciary refuses to oblige him to pay
A bank customer was able to obtain 96 thousand dirhams from an Emirati bank, but the judiciary refused to oblige him to pay the money to the bank, because the bank did not obtain the necessary guarantees before granting him the credit facility.
Read also
A client receives 96 thousand dirhams from an Emirati bank and the judiciary refuses to oblige him to pay
A customer's account at an Emirati bank is credited with 96,000 dirhams, but the judiciary does not order him to pay the money back,A bank customer was able to get 96,000 dirhams from an Emirati bank, but the judiciary refused to compel the customer to pay the money back to the bank. This was due to the fact that the bank had not obtained the requisite guarantees before granting the customer the credit facility.
Abu Dhabi Court rejects a bank’s request to oblige a customer to pay 96 thousand dirhams
The plea of a bank to compel a client to pay 96 thousand dirhams was turned down by the Abu Dhabi Court, After a client ceased paying the value of a credit card, a bank filed a lawsuit against the consumer, demanding that he pay the bank 96,883 dirhams. The Abu Dhabi Commercial Court of First Instance issued a ruling that the bank's claim should be dismissed. Before extending credit to the defendant, the court found that the plaintiff bank had not fulfilled its legal obligation to secure sufficient assurances and had therefore violated the law. The importance of acquiring suitable guarantees in order to support the facilities that are provided to bank clients was highlighted by the court.
A bank in the UAE grants a customer credit facilities without guarantees and he loses his money
A consumer in the UAE loses his money when a bank that lent him money gave him credit facilities without requiring any assurances, In the specifics, a bank filed a lawsuit against a customer, demanding that the customer be obligated to pay the bank a sum totaling 96 thousand and 883 dirhams, and that the ruling include immediate enforcement without bail, with the defendant including fees, expenses, and attorney's fees, indicating that it granted the defendant, upon his request, banking facilities consisting of "Visa," and the former has breached its payment obligations.
Abu Dhabi Court rejects a bank's request to recover its money because it does not have guarantees
The appeal of a bank to recover its money was denied by the Abu Dhabi Court on the grounds that the bank did not have any assurances, For its part, the court explained in the merits of its ruling that it is legally stipulated that licensed financial institutions must obtain adequate guarantees for all types of facilities that are provided to customers, and that no request, claim, or payment shall be accepted before the competent judicial authorities or arbitration bodies if it is filed by one of the licensed financial institutions regarding... A credit facility that is provided to a natural person or a private individual in the form of a loan or line of credit in the form of a loan or line of credit that The judge explained that what can be deduced from the paperwork and records associated with the case is that the defendant received some kind of facility, specifically a credit card. The court came to the conclusion that the plaintiff did not give the guarantees that were made available to him in connection with the loan in question; rather, he was content with the defendant's pay certificate, which does not represent an adequate guarantee to get the facilities that were made available to the latter. This was the conclusion reached by the court. In addition, the court did not discover that he had any other source of income or any other guarantee offered by him through which the plaintiff could collect the amounts owing to him through him in the event that payment was suspended for any reason. This would have allowed the plaintiff to recover the amounts owed to him through him in the event that payment was suspended. The court concluded that it would not accept the plaintiff's claim since the plaintiff had the opportunity to verify the defendant's guarantees before the defendant offered the facility that is the subject of the action. As a result, the court ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant's legal fees.
