admin 
An Arab borrowed Dhs655,000 from another under a signed acknowledgment of debt, but he refused to return the amount on the agreed date, which prompted the lender to file a civil lawsuit before Dubai Court to claim the loan and compensation for the harms he had befallen.
The court obligated the defendant to pay the loan plus legal interest at five per cent annually from the date of the lawsuit until full payment and the incurred fees and expenses of the lawsuit.
The court, however, dismissed the plaintiff’s request for additional compensation and his request to prevent the defendant from traveling.
Last March, the lender filed a lawsuit in which he requested the court to obligate the defendant to pay Dhs655,000, this being the remaining amount of a personal loan he got, in addition to legal interest and compensation of Dhs50,000 for the harms he suffered due to non-payment. He also requested the court to prevent the defendant from traveling for fear that he would leave the country.
The plaintiff pleaded that the defendant had requested a loan from him in October last year and signed a promissory note acknowledging receipt of Dhs695,500 as a personal loan with a commitment to repay the full amount before March of this year.
He stated that the defendant subsequently repaid only Dhs40,000 via bank transfer before ceasing payments despite repeated amicable requests, which forced him to resort to legal action.
The plaintiff submitted an acknowledgment of debt document signed by the defendant and a certified translation thereof. The defendant, however, failed to attend the court sessions despite being legally notified.
The court stated that the case file showed a valid loan relationship with a customary document signed by the defendant and that the latter did not provide any evidence of his fulfillment of his obligation or anything to deny the debt and consequently he was liable for the amount claimed.
The court also clarified that the amount claimed was a fixed sum and would consequently allow for legal interest at five per cent per annum from the date of the lawsuit until full payment.
The court, however, rejected the plaintiff’s request for additional compensation and his request for expedited enforcement without bail. It also dismissed the plaintiff’s request to prevent the defendant from traveling, deeming it outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction.
