The director of a real estate company complains against the decision to imprison him for 166 thousand dirhams

The Federal Supreme Court accepted the appeal of the director of a real estate company against a ruling that rejected his grievance against his imprisonment, on account of his non-payment of a debt worth 166 thousand dirhams owed to a client who bought an apartment from him. The court referred the grievance to the Court of Appeal for further consideration.

A court ruling was issued by a court of first instance against the director of a real estate company, obligating him to return an amount of 166 thousand dirhams to a client, who demanded to cancel the contract for the sale of a residential unit in one of the towers, and to return what she paid to the company, and the court of appeals supported this.

The execution judge issued an order ruling the imprisonment of the company director, for not paying the amount he was sentenced to. If he pays what he owes or submits a bank guarantee or a capable guarantor that the creditor accepts, he will be released immediately. The convict did not agree, so he was grievanced against him.

The Court of First Instance ruled that the grievance would not be accepted if it was submitted outside the legal period of 15 days from becoming aware of the matter complained of, and the Court of Appeal upheld it. This ruling was not accepted by the convict, so he appealed it on the grounds that the ruling had erred in applying the law.

The Federal Supreme Court supported this appeal, explaining that the text in the first paragraph of Article 324 of the Federal Civil Procedure Law states: “The execution judge may issue an order, based on a request submitted by the judgment creditor, to imprison the debtor if he refrains from implementing a final judgment or final performance order despite… Proof of his ability to pay or fear that he will flee the country, and the debtor is not considered capable of paying if his solvency rests entirely on funds that may not be seized or sold.” The third paragraph of Article 325 of the Code stipulates The law itself stipulates: “The grievance against the order shall be made through the procedures prescribed for grievance against the order on petitions.”

She explained that orders on petitions are issued by judges of temporary orders, with their jurisdictional authority, based on requests submitted to them by concerned parties on petitions, and grievances against them may be made according to the circumstances unless the law stipulates otherwise, without specifying a date for raising them, meaning that the deadline remains open to the public. The complainant must file his grievance, and therefore it is not permissible to restrict the grievance to the order issued to imprison the debtor within the period stipulated in Article 147, which stipulates: “The debtor may file a grievance within 15 days,” which does not apply to the convicted person, and without a specification from the law, which means that the ruling avoids correctness, which requires it to be overturned, provided that it be with referral without examining the rest of what was inferred from it.