The Abu Dhabi Family Court and Civil and Administrative Claims rejected a lawsuit filed by a young man against a gym, demanding a full refund of the annual subscription, due to the lack of free parking for his vehicle.
In detail, a young man filed a lawsuit against a sports club (C), demanding that he terminate the contract between them, cancel any obligations resulting from that termination, and recover the previously paid fees, with obligating him to pay fees and expenses, on the basis of saying that he contracted with the defendant to participate in The gymnasium for a year, in exchange for 1990 dirhams, and they verbally agreed to provide parking for his vehicle for the duration of the subscription period, but he was surprised to be informed that he had paid fees for parking the car in the subsequent period for the first four months, and to complete the rest of the membership period other than the agreement, and received a letter from the defendant not objecting to refund the rest The subscription period of eight months, but he refused.
During the consideration of the case, the plaintiff attended and decided that he signed the contract electronically, and it did not include a clause regarding the parking of the car, as the agreement on this matter was oral, and there are no documents indicating the defendant’s commitment to provide a parking lot, and he submitted an explanatory memorandum, while the representative of the defendant attends, It was declared legally.
In the rationale for its ruling, the court explained that the plaintiff instituted the lawsuit by rescinding the membership agreement contract between the parties to the lawsuit, and to recover what was paid, on the pretext that the defendant did not provide a private parking for his car, pointing out that the evidence was established in the papers, and through the agreement that the plaintiff did not deny, and the plaintiff in the lawsuit that The defendant’s obligation was not to provide a private parking for the plaintiff’s vehicle, but the latter decided that the agreement was oral, and thus the lawsuit came devoid of evidence of the defendant’s breach of his obligations arising from the contract, and the plaintiff did not provide evidence of the defendant’s breach of any obligations, and his statements came Sent without evidence, and the annulment request was limited without justification, and the court ruled to reject the case, and obligated the plaintiff to pay fees and expenses.
Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news
“Reader. Infuriatingly humble travel enthusiast. Extreme food scholar. Writer. Communicator.”