Economy Politics Local 2026-03-15T10:40:23+00:00

Dubai Court Orders Repayment of Large Debt Sum

A Dubai court ruled that a man must repay Dh2.25 million borrowed from a friend during a financial crisis, ordering the full amount plus interest. The court also handled a separate case involving the fraudulent acquisition of cryptocurrency worth Dh1.291 million.


Dubai Court Orders Repayment of Large Debt Sum

A court in Dubai has ordered a man to repay Dh2.25 million to a former friend who lent him the money during a financial crisis. The Civil Court of First Instance ruled that the defendant must return the amount after evidence showed that the funds were transferred directly to his bank account and that he failed to provide any legal justification for keeping the money. According to court records, the two men were close friends when the defendant approached the claimant seeking financial help for his struggling business. Trusting their friendship, the claimant agreed to assist and arranged the funds by withdrawing money from his wife’s bank account, which he was legally authorized to manage through a power of attorney. Judges also noted that banking records clearly confirmed the transfer of the money to the defendant’s account. The court said that once the transfer was proven, it became the defendant’s responsibility to show evidence that the money had been repaid or that he had a legal right to keep it. Since the defendant failed to present such proof, the court ruled that the debt remained unpaid and must be returned. The court ordered the defendant to repay the full Dh2.25 million, along with 5 percent annual interest from the date the case was filed until the payment is completed. The claimant told the court that he initially tried to resolve the issue privately, but after repeated delays and unanswered requests, he decided to file a legal case. The defendant denied owing any money and argued that there was no written loan agreement between them. A court in Dubai has ordered a man of Asian nationality to repay Dh1.291 million to another Asian national after fraudulently obtaining digital currency from him. The ruling was issued by the Dubai Court of First Instance following a final criminal conviction against the defendant, who was found guilty of using deceptive methods to take the victim’s virtual assets. According to court records, the victim owned a cryptocurrency wallet and was approached by the defendant, who claimed he wanted to purchase a large amount of digital currency. Investigations revealed that the accused, along with accomplices who are still at large, carried out a scheme designed to gain the victim’s trust. Authorities said the defendant sent several individuals acting as intermediaries to the victim’s workplace to make the proposed transaction appear legitimate. After gaining the victim’s confidence, the defendant met with him the following day and even displayed a large amount of cash to create the impression that the deal was genuine. Believing the transaction was legitimate, the victim transferred part of the cryptocurrency to the defendant’s wallet as an advance payment. He also claimed that the claimant had no legal standing to file the case since the funds came from his wife’s bank account. The court rejected these arguments, stating that the power of attorney allowed the claimant to manage the funds and pursue legal action. He then transferred the amount to his friend’s account, expecting it to be repaid later. However, the repayment never came. However, the defendant failed to complete the purchase and fled with the digital assets. Police later identified the suspect using surveillance footage and arrested him. Prosecutors charged the defendant with fraudulently seizing movable property valued at Dh1,291,500 through deceptive means. A criminal court fined the defendant Dh10,000 and ordered him, along with his accomplices, to repay the money obtained through fraud. Authorities also initially fined the victim Dh50,000 for operating a virtual asset service without the required license. Both parties appealed the ruling. He was also ordered to cover court costs and legal expenses. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision, and the case was later brought before the Court of Cassation. The highest court ultimately rejected the defendant’s appeal and confirmed his conviction, while overturning the penalty imposed on the victim and ordering a retrial on that matter.