“Source: Al Emarat Al Youm – Primary Civil Court – Dubai.”
The Primary Civil Court in Dubai ruled to oblige an insurance company to pay AED 2.59 million to another company, after the latter’s entitlement to recover compensation, it had paid for 49 traffic accidents caused by vehicles insured with the defendant company was established.
The case details go back to a lawsuit filed by an insurance company, in which it stated that it had compensated its clients for damages to their vehicles resulting from various traffic accidents, which were proven to have been caused by vehicles insured with the other company, according to valid insurance policies.
According to the case documents, the plaintiff company paid the full cost of repairs or total loss compensation, after completing the legal procedures, and obtained release forms and assignments of rights from the affected parties before approaching the defendant company to claim the amounts due. However, the defendant company refused to pay without justification.
During the trial, the defendant company contested the validity of some claims, alleging no connection to certain accidents, prior settlement of some claims, insufficient evidence, or exaggeration of losses and damages. This prompted the court to appoint an insurance expert to examine the entire case file.
The expert’s report concluded that the plaintiff company had properly compensated its insured clients for the damages, and that the vehicles insured with the defendant company were responsible for the accidents. The final amount due was determined to be AED 2.59 million after a technical review of the claims. The court explained in its ruling that the Civil Transactions Law allows an insurance company to subrogate the insured—recovering from the party responsible for the damage or their insurer—which is known as the principle of “subrogation,” whether legally or contractually through an assignment of rights.
The court emphasized that the defendant company cannot rely on defenses concerning its relationship with the plaintiff’s clients; its defense is limited to matters that can be raised against the subrogated right itself. The court noted that the expert report was consistent with the submitted documents and free of objections. It stressed that the court has the authority to assess evidence and rely on expert reports that are technically sound, which was satisfied in this case.
Ultimately, the court ruled that the defendant company must pay the claimed amount, with legal interest of 5% per year from the date of the judicial claim until full payment, in addition to fees, expenses, and attorney’s costs.