A European man turned to a friend for help to overcome a financial crisis affecting his business. The friend agreed and lent him 1,514,000 dirhams, plus 225,000 euros transferred to a company account at the debtor’s request.

The lender expected gratitude and timely repayment, but faced delays, excuses, and refusal to repay, forcing him to file a lawsuit.

The civil court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the debtor to repay the claimed amount and pay 100,000 dirhams in compensation for delay and procrastination.

Details: A European man filed a lawsuit demanding his friend repay 1,514,000 dirhams and 225,000 euros (equivalent to 956,250 dirhams), plus legal interest from the claim date until repayment, in addition to 500,000 dirhams as compensation for material and moral damages and lost profits.

He stated in his claim that an old friendship linked him to the defendant. Earlier, the defendant requested a loan due to financial hardship, and the plaintiff lent him 1,514,000 dirhams, then transferred 225,000 euros to a company account affiliated with the defendant, with repayment due on a set date.

He added that he demanded repayment via WhatsApp and Telegram messages, but the defendant made excuses, delayed, and procrastinated, causing significant harm to the plaintiff.

The plaintiff attached bank transfer receipts to the defendant’s personal account for the first amount, transfer receipts to the company’s account for the euros, and copies of communications between the parties.

The defendant appeared in court through a legal agent, claiming the transferred funds were commercial transactions between the parties and were repayments of previous obligations by the plaintiff. The case was referred to accounting expertise.

The court stated that legally, assessing the seriousness of the debt claim is within the court’s authority, provided it is supported by the evidence presented.

It added: “It is also established that the reason for the bank transfer is repayment of a debt owed by the transferor (plaintiff) to the transferee (defendant) under a prior contract, and anyone claiming otherwise must provide evidence.” This means there must be evidence that the amount transferred was not an obligation or repayment of commercial transactions; if proven, the defendant must prove the debt’s expiration and reason.

After reviewing documents and evidence, the court-appointed financial expert confirmed the plaintiff made transfers totaling 1,514,470 dirhams to the defendant’s account.

The court found that the plaintiff provided receipts confirming the bank transfers, while the defendant provided no evidence that the funds were for commercial dealings or payment for goods, only claiming they were for “other transactions.”

The court ruled that the expert report, supported by transfer receipts, proves the defendant owes the claimed amount and ordered repayment in dirhams.

Regarding the plaintiff’s claim for 225,000 euros transferred to a company account affiliated with the defendant, the court found no evidence linking the company to either party or that the amount was transferred for the company’s benefit, thus rejecting this claim due to lack of conclusive evidence.

The court also awarded the plaintiff 100,000 dirhams in material and moral compensation for lost investment opportunities and the costs of litigation.