Abu Dhabi court dismisses Dh155,000 claim in restaurant sale dispute

The Abu Dhabi Commercial Court has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a man who accused a buyer of short-changing him in a restaurant sale, ruling that the plaintiff’s claim was unsupported and contradicted by written agreement between them.

According to a report by Emarat Al Youm, the plaintiff filed a suit demanding Dh155,000, plus 5 per cent legal interest from the date of filing until full payment, along with court and lawyer’s fees. He also requested the court to compel the defendant to take an oath affirming he owed the amount.

He told the court he had sold the restaurant — including its trade name, premises, equipment and all tangible and intangible assets — for Dh450,000. He received an upfront payment, with the remaining Dh355,000 to be paid in 12 equal monthly instalments of Dh29,583 each through post-dated cheques.

However, he said the defendant was unable to honour the remaining payments due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. In May this year, the buyer allegedly contacted him, saying he now had the outstanding balance in cash and wished to settle it. The buyer asked him to bring the original cheques. During their meeting, the seller handed over the cheques and, in return, received a sealed envelope containing the payment. He later claimed he discovered the envelope contained only Dh200,000 — Dh155,000 less than what was owed.

In its judgment, the court said the case file contained no evidence that the defendant breached the contract. It noted that the plaintiff admitted handing over the original cheques, preventing the court from reviewing them. Both parties also acknowledged that ownership of the commercial establishment had been legally transferred to the buyer.

The court added that the sale contract, concluded in writing in 2021, governs the relationship between the parties and no additional evidence was provided to contradict its terms. As a result, the plaintiff’s demands were deemed baseless and unsubstantiated.

The court also rejected the plaintiff’s request to compel the defendant to take an oath regarding the alleged delivery of only Dh200,000 and the return of the cheques. It said the defendant denied any wrongdoing and adhered to the written contract. The court further found that the conditions required to impose a decisive oath were not met due to the plaintiff’s misuse of this legal mechanism.

Accordingly, the court dismissed the case and ordered the plaintiff to pay court fees and legal costs.