UAE court orders a woman to repay a 288,500 AED car loan
The Commercial Court of First Instance in Abu Dhabi recently issued a ruling compelling a woman to pay 288,568 dirhams to a bank.
This amount represents the value of a car that she had purchased with a loan from the plaintiff bank. The woman had defaulted on her payments, refusing to fulfil the installment requirements.
The case unfolded when the bank filed a lawsuit against the client, seeking payment for the car's value. The bank also demanded reimbursement for expenses, attorney fees, and translation fees. The bank requested immediate enforcement of the order without the need for bail.
The background of the case revealed that the defendant had obtained a car financing loan of 262,000 dirhams from the bank with a fixed annual interest rate of 1.99%. The loan was to be repaid over 60 monthly installments. Unfortunately, the defendant failed to make the scheduled payments, leading to the bank's pursuit of the claimed amount.
The Commercial Court, basing its decision on the Commercial Transactions Law, clarified that a bank loan is a contractual agreement where the bank provides the borrower with a specified amount of money, either as a loan or by recording it in the borrower's bank account. The borrower is then obligated to repay the loan and associated interest according to the agreed terms and deadlines.
The court referenced an expert's report, which confirmed that the bank had indeed granted the defendant a car financing loan of 262,000 dirhams. The bank fulfilled its obligations by transferring ownership of the car and disbursing the loan amount. However, the defendant breached her obligations by ceasing payments from the loan's inception, neglecting all subsequent installments. The court emphasised that the defendant's actions amounted to a deliberate attempt to benefit the plaintiff bank, resulting in the outstanding amount of 288,568 dirhams.
Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the bank, compelling the defendant to pay the specified amount. The ruling also obligated the defendant to cover expenses, attorney fees, and translation fees. Any additional requests made by the defendant were rejected, as the court confirmed her breach of obligations dating back to the loan's initiation.
