Abu Dhabi court dismisses father’s lawsuit after daughter swears oath she never received vehicle
A father’s attempt to reclaim a vehicle from his daughter through the Abu Dhabi Court for Family, Civil and Administrative Claims has been dismissed after the daughter swore a decisive oath that she never received the car.
Lawsuit details
The father had filed a lawsuit seeking to compel his daughter either to transfer the vehicle’s ownership into her name at the Traffic and Licensing Department or, if she refused, to return the car to him. He valued the vehicle at AED10,000 and said accumulated traffic fines amounted to AED500. The plaintiff also reserved the right to claim compensation later for the total value of fines, fees and penalties arising from her use of the car from the date she was notified of the case. He requested that she be ordered to pay court costs and legal fees, and that the judgment be immediately enforceable.
In his claim, the father explained that he had given the vehicle to his daughter as assistance for her use and benefit. He said he repeatedly asked her to transfer ownership into her name, but she refused, committed several traffic violations while driving the car, and declined to pay them.
Daughter’s denial and decisive oath
During proceedings, the daughter denied possessing the vehicle and denied having any relationship with her father since 2023. She also stated that her father had stopped paying her maintenance from that date.
The plaintiff requested that the court administer a decisive oath to the defendant before ruling. The daughter subsequently swore that she had not received the disputed vehicle from the plaintiff and that it was not in her possession.
Court ruling
In its ruling, the court explained that a decisive oath may be requested by a litigant when they lack evidence to support their claim. It noted that such an oath is not direct evidence but rather a supplementary legal mechanism that carries risks for the party relying on it when other evidence is unavailable.
The court stated that once the decisive oath is taken by the person to whom it is directed, the dispute is resolved on the matters covered by the oath.
The court noted that the plaintiff sought to compel the defendant to transfer ownership of the vehicle or, alternatively, return it after settling the traffic violations. It found that he relied on the decisive oath because the case file contained no evidence supporting his claim. The court granted his request for the oath, which the defendant took in the prescribed legal form. As a result, the court applied the legal effect of the oath, dismissed the lawsuit and ordered the plaintiff to pay the legal expenses.
