Husband ordered to cover legal costs after losing a lawsuit related to his wife’s property transaction.
Dubai: A man has filed a lawsuit against his wife, seeking over Dh5.8 million in financial and moral compensation, alleging that she transferred ownership of their family home to herself and later sold it while he was abroad. However, the claim was ultimately dismissed by a civil court in Dubai.
The dispute revolved around a general power of attorney the husband had granted during their marriage, giving his wife broad authority to manage his affairs. The document, as reviewed by the court, explicitly permitted her not only to buy and sell property on his behalf but also to gift assets to herself or others, and to accept such gifts in his name.
According to Emarat Al Youm, court records show that the wife used this authority to execute a formal gift contract, transferring ownership of the property to herself. The transaction was duly notarised by a registrar at the Dubai Land Department, completing all legal requirements for the transfer.
The case centred on a general power of attorney the husband had given his wife during their marriage, granting her wide-ranging authority over his affairs. As reviewed by the court, the document allowed her not only to buy and sell property on his behalf, but also to transfer assets as gifts—including to herself—and to accept such gifts in his name.
Court records reported by Emarat Al Youm indicate that the wife used this authority to complete a formal gift deed, transferring ownership of the property to herself. The transaction was then officially notarised by a registrar at the Dubai Land Department, fulfilling all legal procedures required for the ownership transfer.
He argued that the property transfer and subsequent sale exceeded the trust inherent in their marital relationship, and sought Dh5.64 million in material damages along with Dh250,000 for moral harm.
The wife, however, maintained that her actions were fully within the authority granted to her under the power of attorney. She presented evidence including email correspondence from her husband expressing his intention to transfer the property to her as a gift, as well as official communications supporting the transaction.
In its judgment, the court noted that a power of attorney is a legal instrument that allows a principal to authorise another person to act on their behalf, with its scope defined strictly by its wording.
After reviewing the document, the court found that it explicitly went beyond routine administrative powers and allowed the wife to gift property to herself. The court therefore concluded that her actions did not constitute an abuse of authority but were carried out within the legal limits of the mandate.
The court also examined the legal definition of a gift, noting that it involves the transfer of ownership without consideration, based on the intention to donate. It found that all essential elements of a valid gift were met in this case, as demonstrated by formal registration, the transfer of ownership, and the subsequent sale of the property.
It further stated that the law imposes strict limitations on revoking gifts, particularly between spouses, and such gifts cannot generally be reversed unless exceptional circumstances are proven—none of which were present in this case.
The court accepted the submitted email correspondence as valid legal evidence, noting that such communications carry the evidentiary value of customary documents when not disputed by either party.
Regarding the compensation claim, the court emphasised that liability—whether contractual or tortious—requires proof of three elements: fault, damage, and causation. It concluded that no fault could be attributed to the wife, as her actions were legally authorised, and no unlawful harm had been established.
With one of the essential elements of liability missing, the court dismissed the case in full and ordered the plaintiff to bear the court fees, expenses, and Dh1,000 in legal costs.
