The Abu Dhabi Commercial Court of First Instance ruled to oblige the owner of a pet to provide a veterinary clinic with an amount of 8,746 dirhams, the value of remedial procedures that included medical examinations and a surgical operation that the dog owned by him underwent, noting that the defendant failed to prove payment of the amount in question.
In detail, a veterinary clinic filed a lawsuit against a dog owner, demanding that he be obligated to return to it an amount of 8,746 dirhams, and obliging him to pay the legal interest at the rate of 12% from the date of filing the lawsuit until full payment, while obliging him to pay the legal expenses, noting that the defendant received the pet owned by him for therapeutic services and the necessary examinations and diagnostics, and he also underwent surgery to remove part of the ears, while the defendant submitted a response memorandum seeking At its conclusion, the court rejected the case for lack of validity and proof, and accepted the evidence of payment: the bank transfer and the plaintiff’s letter of payment, and denied any documents or invoices that did not have his signature, while obliging the plaintiff to submit the partner’s account statement in the commercial license to prove payment of the amount.
For its part, the court explained in the merits of its ruling that the plaintiff submitted as support for her claim a copy of an invoice, dated June 2025, with a value of 8746 dirhams, and appended with a signature attributed to the defendant. What was proven from the papers was the defendant’s failure to pay, especially since he did not raise any challenges that undermined the validity of his signature on the claimed invoice. He also did not deny that the pet owned by him received therapeutic services and underwent surgery at the The plaintiff, in addition to the fact that he did not provide any basis or amount that would jeopardize the entitlement to what he owed for the benefit of the plaintiff with legally valid evidence, especially since he is charged with the burden of proving that, noting that this does not affect what the defendant claims, namely that he paid the amount by transferring amounts to the plaintiff’s bank account and received an invoice from the plaintiff confirming that payment.
The court indicated that the invoice attached by the defendant is dated and due for payment in May 2025, which is the date on which the invoice attached by the defendant has no right, and what is evident from what is written in the invoice (claim document) is that there are previous invoices owed by the defendant whose value he has paid, with which the court concludes that the amounts the defendant claims to have paid were for the previous invoice and not for the invoice whose value is claimed, and therefore the lawsuit documents are authoritative in the place of proof for the court to consider.
Regarding the request for legal interest, the court indicated that according to the legally established delay interest claimed when the debtor is negligent in fulfilling his obligation, it amounts to compensation for the damage caused to the creditor as a result of delay in fulfillment, and that if the subject of the commercial obligation is a sum of money and the amount is known at the time the obligation arose and the debtor delays in committing to it, then the creditor has the right to demand interest on his behalf, and the court ruled to oblige the defendant to pay the plaintiff an amount worth 8,746 dirhams. By obliging him to pay legal interest on the adjudicated amount at the rate of 3% annually from the date of the judicial claim until full payment, not to exceed the principal of the adjudicated debt, and by obligating him to pay judicial expenses.
