The Al Ain Court of First Instance ruled obligating a broker to refund 40,000 dirhams that he obtained in exchange for his mediation in selling a property, and the court indicated that the defendant did not hold any effective commercial license at the time of buying the house that would allow him to carry out mediation and brokerage work.
In the details, a man filed a lawsuit against another, in which he demanded that he be obliged to return 40,000 dirhams that he had unlawfully and falsely seized, and oblige him to pay him compensation in the amount of 10,000 dirhams as a result of psychological and moral damage as a result of procrastination and procrastination.
He indicated that he had purchased a property – a residential building – with the knowledge of the defendant through his work as a broker, and after he obtained the property, he handed over the brokerage value to the defendant, but the latter did not hand him the mediation contract and its tax invoice, and started procrastinating and turned off his phone, and it became clear to him that the defendant is not Certified real estate broker.
While the defendant submitted a response memorandum to the case, he requested at its conclusion to dismiss the case and oblige the plaintiff to pay fees and expenses. He also attached a copy of a real estate broker’s license certificate dated in 2017, a copy of the commercial license and a copy of a receipt of a receipt, and the defendant decided that he had some Judicial circumstances that would prevent him from renewing the brokerage firm’s commercial license.
--For its part, the court clarified that it was proven from reviewing the papers and documents of the case that the defendant did not provide what authorizes him to carry out real estate mediation work regarding the house after the expiration of the commercial license submitted by him, in addition to that at the time of purchasing the house, he did not hold any effective commercial license.
The court rejected the request for compensation, pointing out that the plaintiff did not provide the court with evidence that there had been damages, and ruled that the defendant should pay 40,000 dirhams to the plaintiff.
The court confirmed that the defendant did not provide what authorizes him to carry out real estate brokerage work regarding the house after the expiration of the commercial license submitted by him.
