UAE
Court Upholds Deportation for Man Who Tampered With Sealed Murder Scene
Judges reject defendant’s lease agreement defense, citing proof he was fully aware prosecutors had sealed the premises.
A man who broke into a sealed apartment and removed its contents during an active murder investigation has lost his final appeal against deportation before the UAE Federal Supreme Court.
The country’s highest court upheld the lower court’s conviction after concluding that the defendant knowingly altered a crime scene, tampered with potential evidence, and attempted to mislead law enforcement officials.
Court records revealed that the apartment had been jointly occupied by the defendant and another individual directly implicated in a murder case. Following the crime, public prosecutors ordered the property to be sealed and placed under strict judicial control to preserve all forensic evidence connected to the killing.
Despite clear legal restrictions, the defendant forcibly broke the lock, entered the secured premises, and cleared out furniture and other belongings, changing the physical condition of the crime scene. Prosecutors subsequently charged him with altering a crime scene and removing potential evidence to obstruct an ongoing police investigation.
A lower court initially convicted the man and ordered his immediate deportation from the UAE in lieu of a one-year prison sentence. That verdict was subsequently upheld by the Court of Appeal, prompting the defendant to take his case to the Federal Supreme Court.
In his final appeal, the defendant argued that he was a lawful tenant under a valid lease agreement and claimed he entered the apartment solely to retrieve his personal belongings after receiving permission from the landlord. He further denied having any knowledge that public prosecutors had formally barred entry to the property, while his defense lawyer argued that prosecution failed to establish criminal intent.
However, the Supreme Court firmly rejected these claims, citing CCTV surveillance footage, witness statements, and the defendant’s own admissions during initial questioning.
Crucially, investigative records showed that the defendant had previously contacted prosecutors to inquire why the apartment had been sealed. Judges ruled that this prior communication conclusively proved he was aware the property was tied to a murder probe and restricted by law.
The Supreme Court concluded that the lower courts had properly evaluated the evidence and that the defendant's deliberate decision to break into the sealed unit fully established all legal elements of the crime. Dismissing the appeal, the court declared the conviction and deportation order final.
For enquiries or further information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call +971 52 644 3004 . Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.
Dubai Court Orders Three Men to Pay Woman Dh2.1M Over Breached Settlement
Appellees failed to honor financial agreement after plaintiff dropped criminal complaint in good faith.
The Dubai Civil Court has ordered three men to jointly pay a woman Dh2.1 million, along with 5% annual interest calculated from the date the lawsuit was filed until full payment is made. The ruling comes after the men breached a legally binding settlement agreement in which they promised to pay the amount in exchange for the plaintiff withdrawing a criminal complaint against them.
The dispute stems from an initial lawsuit filed by the woman involving allegations of fraud, breach of trust, and forgery against one of the men. During court proceedings, the parties entered into negotiations that concluded with a signed settlement agreement in April 2026. Under the terms of the deal, the defendant and two co-signers jointly agreed to issue a cheque for Dh2.1 million to the plaintiff as compensation for dropping her criminal case.
While the plaintiff fulfilled her part of the agreement and submitted an official waiver to the Public Prosecution, the men repeatedly refused to deliver the cheque or pay the agreed amount.
Upon further inquiry with the Public Prosecution, the woman discovered that a sum previously deposited by the defendants was not intended for her. Instead, the money had been posted as a financial guarantee to lift a travel ban imposed on one of the men, confirming to the court that they had failed to meet their contractual obligations.
During the civil trial, the court dismissed a plea by the defense claiming the court lacked jurisdiction. Judges clarified that the matter was not tied to a rental agreement or lease execution, but rather concerned an independent financial debt arising directly from the settlement contract.
Additionally, the court denied a defense motion to pause the civil lawsuit until the conclusion of parallel criminal proceedings. The court emphasized that the financial entitlement was already settled under a valid contract and was not dependent on the final outcome of any criminal case.
In its final verdict, the court affirmed that the settlement contract was legally binding and that the plaintiff had fully honored her obligation. Because the defendants failed to provide proof of payment or deliver the promised cheque, the court ordered all three men to jointly pay Dh2.1 million plus 5% annual interest, alongside all court fees, expenses, and legal costs.
For enquiries or further information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call +971 52 644 3004 . Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.
Ajman Court Jails Man For Six Months, Fines Dh5,000 Over Assault On Woman
The court convicted the 41-year-old after reviewing witness testimony, police records and medical evidence.
A 41-year-old Asian man has been sentenced to six months in prison and fined Dh5,000 after an Ajman court found him guilty of assaulting a woman and causing injuries that temporarily prevented her from carrying out her normal personal activities.
The Ajman Federal Court of First Instance, Third Misdemeanour Circuit, also ordered the defendant to pay court fees and referred the woman’s claim for compensation to the competent Civil Court.
Woman Reports Assault To Police
The case originated on January 30, 2026, when the woman reported to Ajman Police that the defendant had physically assaulted her.
A subsequent medical examination documented injuries sustained in the incident and found that they had resulted in temporary incapacity lasting less than 20 days.
The Public Prosecution charged the man with intentionally assaulting the woman and causing injuries that prevented her from carrying out her normal personal activities during that period.
Court Examines Evidence
According to the case records, the defendant initially admitted to the assault during police questioning but subsequently denied the charge during the Public Prosecution investigation. He maintained his denial when appearing before the court through a remote video hearing.
The court examined the woman’s statements, witness testimony, police and prosecution records, and the medical report documenting her injuries.
After assessing the evidence, the court found the defendant guilty. It took into account the consistency of the woman’s account, the medical findings and the defendant’s initial statement to police before he later denied the allegation.
Compensation Claim Sent To Civil Court
The woman’s legal representatives filed a civil claim seeking provisional compensation for the physical, material and moral harm allegedly caused by the assault.
The criminal proceedings did not determine the full extent or monetary value of the damages claimed. The court held that these matters required a separate civil assessment and referred the compensation claim to the competent Civil Court under Article 26 of the Criminal Procedure Law.
The Civil Court will schedule a hearing and notify the parties before examining the claim.
The criminal judgment imposes a six-month prison term, a Dh5,000 fine and court fees. Any compensation awarded for the alleged physical, material or moral damages will be determined separately through the civil proceedings.
For enquiries or further information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.
Wife Awarded Dh50,000 After Husband’s Assault Leaves Her With Fractured Teeth
Final criminal conviction establishes husband’s liability for injuries and psychological harm suffered by his wife.
A woman who suffered fractured upper front teeth, a deep cut to her tongue and bruising to her right shoulder after being assaulted by her husband has been awarded Dh50,000 in compensation by the Al Dhafra Court of First Instance.
The court held that a final criminal judgment against the husband was binding on the civil proceedings in establishing that the assault had occurred and that he was responsible for it.
It found that the requirements for civil liability, including wrongful conduct, damage and a causal link between the two, had been satisfied.
The woman had filed a lawsuit against her husband, an African national, seeking Dh100,000 for material, physical, psychological and cosmetic harm resulting from the assault. She also requested annual late-payment interest of 5 per cent, court costs and lawyers’ fees.
According to the case records, the husband entered her room following an argument and struck her in the face and body. The assault resulted in injuries documented in a medical report.
He had previously been convicted in the criminal proceedings of assault causing bodily harm and sentenced to two months in prison, with the sentence suspended, and fined Dh10,000. The civil compensation claim was subsequently referred to the competent court.
The husband contested the claim, asking the court to dismiss it on the grounds that his wife had not sufficiently established the extent or value of the alleged damage. He also argued that she had failed to provide adequate evidence of the material and future losses underlying her Dh100,000 demand.
In its judgment, the civil court said the unlawful act considered in the criminal case was the same conduct on which the compensation claim was based. As the criminal judgment had become final, it conclusively established the occurrence of the assault, its legal character and the husband’s responsibility.
The medical report confirmed that the woman had sustained a deep cut to her tongue, fractures to her upper front teeth and bruising to her right shoulder. The court found that these injuries amounted to compensable harm directly attributable to the assault.
It also recognised the psychological and emotional suffering caused by the incident, holding the husband liable for that harm as well.
The court ordered him to pay Dh50,000 in compensation for material and moral damages, together with annual interest of 4 per cent until the amount is paid in full. He was also directed to bear the court costs and pay Dh200 towards lawyers’ fees.
For enquiries or further information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call +971 52 644 3004 . Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.
Court Orders Man to Pay Dh7,599 for Assaulting Person, Damaging His Phone
The court awarded Dh5,099 for damaged phone and Dh2,500 for the emotional distress caused by the assault.
The Abu Dhabi Court for Family, Civil and Administrative Cases has ordered an individual to pay Dh7,599 in compensation for physically assaulting another person, verbally abusing him in public and damaging his mobile phone by forcibly throwing it.
The claimant had filed a lawsuit seeking Dh20,000 in compensation for material and moral damages arising from the incident. His claim included Dh5,099 for the damaged phone and Dh14,901 for the physical assault, verbal abuse and resulting harm to his dignity and reputation.
He also requested interest at 5 per cent a year from the date of filing the case until full payment, in addition to court fees and legal expenses. In support of his claim, he submitted the criminal judgment against the defendant, a certificate confirming that the judgment had become final, and the phone's purchase invoice.
The court examined the purchase invoice, which established that the phone was worth Dh5,099. Having found that the device was damaged as a result of the defendant's actions, the court concluded that the claimant had suffered a direct financial loss equivalent to its value.
It consequently awarded Dh5,099 to compensate for the material damage caused by the destruction of the phone.
The court also considered the findings of the criminal judgment, which established that the defendant had directed insulting and abusive remarks at the claimant, harming his honour and reputation. The incident had taken place in public, in the presence of other people, and involved both verbal abuse and the forcible seizure and throwing of the phone.
The court held that such conduct could undermine a person's dignity and standing in society, causing embarrassment, distress and psychological suffering. It treated these consequences as moral damage distinct from the financial loss resulting from the damaged device.
Finding a direct causal link between the defendant's conduct and the claimant's non-material harm, the court assessed compensation for the emotional and psychological suffering at Dh2,500.
The total compensation was therefore fixed at Dh7,599, comprising Dh5,099 for material damage and Dh2,500 for moral harm.
For enquiries or further information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call +971 52 644 3004 . Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.
Dubai Court Cancels Dh92,000 Cybersecurity Contract Over Delays, Missing Documents
Supplier ordered to refund Dhs42,000 advance payment and pay Dh10,000 in compensation.
The Dubai Commercial Court has rescinded a contract worth Dh92,000 for the supply of network security devices after finding that the supplier had exceeded the agreed delivery deadline by four weeks and failed to provide documents certifying the products’ authenticity and compliance with specifications.
The court ordered the defendant company to refund the Dh42,000 advance payment made by the plaintiff and pay Dh10,000 in compensation, in addition to returning the security cheque and paying legal interest, court expenses and attorney fees.
The dispute arose from a contract signed in October 2025 under which the defendant agreed to supply a firewall device and a three-year protection subscription within seven weeks of receiving the first installment. The agreement also required the supplier to provide certificates and technical documents establishing the products’ authenticity and conformity with the agreed specifications.
The plaintiff paid Dh42,000 in advance. In January 2026, the supplier informed the company that the devices had arrived. However, when the plaintiff sought to inspect the equipment and examine the required documentation before completing the delivery process and paying the outstanding amount, the necessary arrangements and documents were not provided.
Amid the dispute over delivery delays, product quality and contractual obligations, the court appointed an expert to examine the agreement and assess whether the parties had fulfilled their respective responsibilities.
The expert’s report found that the supplier had missed the agreed delivery deadline by four weeks and had failed to produce the certificates and supporting documents required to establish the devices’ origin, authenticity and compliance with the contractual specifications.
The court concluded that the delay and failure to provide the required documentation constituted a breach of contract, satisfying the conditions for judicial rescission.
It also found that the supplier’s conduct had caused the plaintiff company material and moral damage, warranting compensation of Dh10,000. The defendant’s request for similar compensation was rejected because it had failed to prove that the rescission had caused it any damage.
In addition to rescinding the agreement, the court ordered the supplier to return the advance payment of Dh42,000, hand back the security cheque and pay legal interest, litigation costs and attorney fees.
For enquiries or further information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call +971 52 644 3004 . Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.
Dubai Court Rejects Company’s Fresh Bid to Claim Ownership of Luxury Yacht
Court rules that the dispute was conclusively settled by final judgments, ordering the claimant to pay costs and legal fees.
A Dubai court has dismissed a company’s attempt to establish ownership of a luxury yacht, ruling that the matter had already been conclusively determined by final court judgments. The company was ordered to bear the legal costs and pay Dh6,000 in legal fees.
The claimant argued that it had financed the yacht’s construction and was its rightful owner, although the vessel was registered in the name of another company. It also sought to halt enforcement of an earlier judgment, alleging that the ruling had been secured through fraud, deception and collusion.
According to court records, the company said it had entered into agreements with shipbuilders in 2009 to construct the yacht for its benefit. It maintained that the purchase price and associated expenses had been paid from its own funds.
To support its claim, the company submitted payment records, receipts and other documents. It argued that the yacht had subsequently been registered through a separate company established for that purpose and asked the court to recognise its ownership, allowing the vessel to be registered in its name or that of an affiliated entity.
The dispute stemmed from an earlier case in which a court found that the yacht’s registered title was not genuine and recognised another party as its lawful owner. That judgment also invalidated the vessel’s transfer and sale to another entity, permitting the successful party to register it through an affiliated company.
The ruling was subsequently upheld on appeal and by the Court of Cassation, making it final and binding.
Ownership Dispute Cannot Be Reopened
In dismissing the latest claim, the court held that the central question of ownership had already been adjudicated and could not be litigated again. It relied on the legal principle that a final judgment bars a fresh challenge where the parties, subject matter and legal grounds are substantially the same.
The court explained that this principle extends beyond the formal outcome of an earlier case to the essential issues underpinning the judgment. It found that the previous proceedings had definitively addressed the validity of the yacht’s title and ownership, including the invalidity of the registered ownership arrangement.
The claimant could not therefore initiate new proceedings to challenge or circumvent a judgment that had already acquired final legal effect.
The court also considered the corporate structure of the companies involved, emphasising that each registered company possesses a separate legal personality from its shareholders, managers and affiliated entities.
It concluded that the evidence submitted by the claimant was insufficient to establish that it was the yacht’s legal owner or that the company named on the registration documents was merely holding the vessel in name only.
Finding no legal grounds to disturb the earlier judgments, the court dismissed the ownership claim in its entirety. It also rejected the company’s urgent application to suspend enforcement of the previous ruling. The claimant was ordered to pay the court costs and Dh6,000 in legal fees.
For enquiries or further information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call +971 52 644 3004 . Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.
Court Recovers Dh7.8 Million in Labour Dues for 948 Workers Through Settlements
Abu Dhabi Labour Court secures Dh7.8 million for workers through settlements
Three collective cases involving Dh12.3 million in claims were resolved through judicial deposits and amicable agreement.
An Abu Dhabi court has recovered Dh7,811,933 in unpaid labour dues for 948 workers within three months, helping safeguard their financial entitlements while supporting employment stability and business continuity.
The Abu Dhabi Labour Court secured the payments through judicial deposits and direct payments under amicable settlements in three collective cases, involving total claims of Dh12.3 million. The recovery was achieved through co-ordinated efforts by the court, the UAE Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratisation (MoHRE) and the parties involved in enforcing the settlements.
Under the agreements, 457 workers received their full entitlements, while another 491 were paid part of the amounts due to them. The outstanding balances are to be recovered through regular instalments, allowing the collection process to continue.
The settlement process also enabled the workers to retain their jobs with the companies concerned. The approach is intended to preserve stable employment relationships, sustain economic activity and help businesses maintain their operations while meeting their financial obligations.
Resolving Labour Disputes in the UAE
The UAE resolved 98.6 per cent of labour disputes amicably during the first half of 2026, according to figures released by MoHRE.
The ministry's dispute resolution system settled 185,793 cases during the period, while 2,481 disputes, accounting for 1.4 per cent of the total, were referred to the judiciary for further proceedings.
One factor behind the high settlement rate is MoHRE's authority to adjudicate labour disputes directly when claims do not exceed Dh50,000. The measure has helped speed up the resolution of employment-related claims, ease the workload of local courts and enable workers and other claimants to obtain their legal entitlements more quickly.
For enquiries or further information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call +971 52 644 3004 . Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.
Court Jails Two For Three Months For Drug Consumption, Orders Deportation
Federal Supreme Court upholds 3-month jail terms and deportation for consuming psychotropic substances.
The Abu Dhabi Federal Supreme Court has upheld the conviction of two suspects for consuming psychotropic and narcotic substances, sentencing each to three months in prison followed by deportation from the UAE.
The case began after the Public Prosecution referred the suspects and others to criminal trial on charges including membership of an organised gang and possession of amphetamines with intent to traffic.
According to the case documents, the first suspect consumed morphine outside the circumstances permitted by law and later took the psychotropic substances Nordazepam, Oxazepam and Temazepam. The second and third suspects were also accused of consuming morphine.
The court of first instance sentenced the first and second suspects to three months in prison each for drug consumption. It also ordered the confiscation of the seized items and their deportation from the UAE after completion of their sentences.
The Public Prosecution appealed against the ruling concerning the charge of belonging to an organised gang. The Federal Court of Appeal accepted the appeal in form but rejected it on its merits.
The Federal Supreme Court subsequently upheld the appeal ruling, leaving the prison sentences, confiscation order and deportation of the two convicted suspects in place.
For enquiries or further information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call +971 52 644 3004 . Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.
Man Ordered To Pay Dh600,000 After Failing To Pay For Camels He Bought
WhatsApp exchanges showed the buyer acknowledged the debt and promised to settle the amount.
The Al Ain Court of Civil, Commercial and Administrative Cases recently ordered a man to pay Dh600,000 to a camel seller after he received 10 camels but failed to pay the agreed price. The court also ordered him to bear the lawsuit fees and expenses.
According to case papers, the seller filed a lawsuit seeking Dh600,000 from the buyer, saying he had sold him 10 camels for that amount. Despite receiving the animals, the buyer failed to make the payment even after repeated demands, the seller said.
To support his claim, the seller submitted WhatsApp exchanges between the two parties in which he demanded payment and the buyer responded in a manner that acknowledged the outstanding amount and indicated that he would pay it.
The court found that the WhatsApp correspondence constituted evidence supporting the seller's claim. The exchanges included the seller's repeated requests for payment and the buyer's responses promising to settle the debt.
The court also noted that the buyer did not dispute the contents of the WhatsApp conversations during the case preparation stage. Instead, he acknowledged that he had purchased the camels from the seller and owed the full amount claimed, while saying that he was unable to pay it at that time.
The court therefore ordered the buyer to pay Dh600,000 to the seller, in addition to the applicable lawsuit fees and expenses.
For enquiries or further information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call +971 52 644 3004 . Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.