Abu Dhabi: UAE courts have heard several cases in which claimants lost substantial sums of money they had transferred to others because they were unable to prove the true purpose of those transfers. Courts reaffirmed that the burden of proof rests entirely on the claimant, as the legal principle is the presumption of innocence.
Meanwhile, the General Secretariat of the National Committee for Combating Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing has urged bank customers to accurately state the purpose of transfers and avoid automatically selecting “family support” for all transactions
Legal adviser Hossam Al-Mawafi stressed that the purpose of a bank transfer should not be treated as a simple procedural field completed with the quickest description. He said the stated purpose could later become an important factor in verifying the nature of the transaction, the source of funds and the reason for the transfer, whether before a financial institution or in the event of a legal dispute.
According to cases, several plaintiffs failed to recover funds because they could not prove the actual purpose of transfers made to other parties.
In one case, a court dismissed a lawsuit filed by a young man seeking the return of more than AED90,000 transferred to a colleague in three instalments. The court also ordered him to pay legal costs after he failed to provide evidence that the transfers were loans.
The ruling stated that bank statements and transfer receipts prove only that funds were transferred, not the legal basis for the transfer. As the defendant denied the existence of a loan, the burden of proof remained with the plaintiff, who failed to establish the existence of a debt.
In another case, a court rejected a claim filed by a woman seeking the return of AED169,000 and AED50,000 in compensation after alleging that a young man exploited her trust and promised marriage in order to obtain loans and financial commitments for his benefit.
The court found that the case lacked conclusive evidence and supporting receipts proving the defendant’s liability.
In a third case, a court rejected a woman’s claim seeking the return of AED335,000, which she said she paid on behalf of her husband towards a car loan, in addition to AED30,000 in compensation. The court ordered her to pay legal costs after finding that she failed to prove the existence of any debt agreement.
The court stated that the documents submitted did not establish that the transfers from the claimant’s account had been made to the car company for the purpose of financing the vehicle. The documents also failed to provide other evidence supporting her claim.
Transfer purpose
The General Secretariat of the National Committee for Combating Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Financing of the Proliferation of Weapons urged users of banking applications to select transfer purposes that accurately reflect the nature of their transactions and avoid automatically choosing “family support” for unrelated transfers.
The recommendation was made as part of the “Moment of Awareness” programme launched by the General Secretariat to address community issues through simplified educational content aimed at promoting awareness and positive behaviour.
Legal adviser Hossam Al-Mawafi stressed that the purpose of a bank transfer should not be treated as a simple procedural field completed with the quickest description. He said the stated purpose could later become an important factor in verifying the nature of the transaction, the source of funds and the reason for the transfer, whether before a financial institution or in the event of a legal dispute.
According to cases, several plaintiffs failed to recover funds because they could not prove the actual purpose of transfers made to other parties.
In one case, a court dismissed a lawsuit filed by a young man seeking the return of more than AED90,000 transferred to a colleague in three instalments. The court also ordered him to pay legal costs after he failed to provide evidence that the transfers were loans.
The ruling stated that bank statements and transfer receipts prove only that funds were transferred, not the legal basis for the transfer. As the defendant denied the existence of a loan, the burden of proof remained with the plaintiff, who failed to establish the existence of a debt.
In another case, a court rejected a claim filed by a woman seeking the return of AED169,000 and AED50,000 in compensation after alleging that a young man exploited her trust and promised marriage in order to obtain loans and financial commitments for his benefit.
The court found that the case lacked conclusive evidence and supporting receipts proving the defendant’s liability.
In a third case, a court rejected a woman’s claim seeking the return of AED335,000, which she said she paid on behalf of her husband towards a car loan, in addition to AED30,000 in compensation. The court ordered her to pay legal costs after finding that she failed to prove the existence of any debt agreement.
The court stated that the documents submitted did not establish that the transfers from the claimant’s account had been made to the car company for the purpose of financing the vehicle. The documents also failed to provide other evidence supporting her claim.
Transfer purpose
The General Secretariat of the National Committee for Combating Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Financing of the Proliferation of Weapons urged users of banking applications to select transfer purposes that accurately reflect the nature of their transactions and avoid automatically choosing “family support” for unrelated transfers.
The recommendation was made as part of the “Moment of Awareness” programme launched by the General Secretariat to address community issues through simplified educational content aimed at promoting awareness and positive behaviour.
