WBG Camp V. Federal Civil Transactions Law

6. The camp said by the defendant that the original plaintiff transferred by the original plaintiff in early 2012 to the back of the plot subject of dispute which called under the name (WBG Camp) rent it, and benefit from it, this implies on the cross plaintiff's acknowledgement and its recognition that the original plaintiff has transferred the camp in 2012 but it erred in determining the next plot.

The original plaintiff reviewed the provisions of the Federal Civil Transactions Law No. (5) of 1985, the articles (247- 267 – 292 – 884 – 888 – 889) which affords aggrieved compensation from avoiding the contract. As reported in the provision of both article (88) and article (90) of the federal commercial transactions law No. (18) of 1993 in …show more content…
With regard to prove attorneys' costs amount of AED (750.000.00), where attached with its pleading of document No. (2) to benefit of its endurance this amount as attorneys' fees.

2. Concerning the request for the reopening of proceedings, the cross plaintiff summarized its following request reasons:
1. Providing a proof of receipt of the original plaintiff to the notice the cross plaintiff dated on 23/08/2011, submitted by the cross plaintiff by the document (2) attached with pleaing.
2. Proving that the projects of the cross plaintiff in Ruwais district was valid and not cancelled, reached its number four projects, the number of workers of the cross plaintiff was more than five thousand workers
3. Summoning the company Manager of the cross plaintiff for hearing.

The cross plaintiff concluded its closing statement by reaffirming on the demands pre-submitted in the previous pleadings on both the original and counter claim.
As folded the pleading on a pocket consisting of (2) document, including the