Saudi Arabia
JordanSuccess Story
A claim of a contractor against project owner to count already approved executed works
- Home page
- Success Stories
- Debt collection Suc
This case was submitted to our office in 2015, and we were representing defendant: –
Background:
In 2015, our office represented the defendant in a complex case where a contracting company (“Plaintiff”) filed a claim against our client, the project owner (“Defendant”), over financial dues related to a construction contract. Despite having received payments for approved work and the completion of a final inventory, the plaintiff alleged fraud, deceit, and complicity in the process, seeking additional compensation beyond the previously agreed-upon amounts.
Case Details:
The defendant entered into a contract with the plaintiff for the construction of a house. As the construction neared completion, the plaintiff notified the defendant that they would be unable to finish the remaining work. The defendant, in turn, requested a final inventory of completed works and an assessment of the outstanding financial balance to settle the contractual obligations.
The inventory concluded that SR 51,000 remained due to the plaintiff. This amount was paid, and both parties signed a Clearance Certificate, confirming that the plaintiff had received all financial dues. The clearance was duly registered with the Chamber of Commerce, making it an official and legally binding document.
Despite this, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming that one of their employees had manipulated the inventory process and that the actual amount due was SR 159,000, not the SR 51,000 documented in the clearance. The plaintiff further argued that the person who signed off on the clearance was not authorized, casting doubt on the validity of the process.
Our Defense:
We successfully defended the defendant by focusing on the following key points:
- Legality of the Clearance Certificate: The signed clearance certificate was valid, authenticated by the relevant authorities, and clearly stated that all payments had been made, and the contract was concluded.
- Lack of Evidence for Fraud or Deceit: The plaintiff's allegations of fraud were unsubstantiated. Any issues with their employee's actions, if proven, should be handled internally within their company, not by our client.
- Finality of the Inventory Process: Once the final inventory was completed and the payment made, the defendant had already engaged a new contractor to finish the remaining work, making any attempts to revisit the inventory process unnecessary.
- No Financial Irregularities: Our defense demonstrated that the defendant had fully honored the contract, and the plaintiff's claims were without merit.
Judgment and Outcome:
The General Court, after thoroughly reviewing the facts, dismissed the plaintiff’s claim. The ruling was based on the valid clearance certificate, which confirmed that the defendant had fulfilled all financial obligations, and thus had no further financial responsibility toward the plaintiff. This judgment resolved the case in our client’s favor, effectively dismissing the plaintiff’s claims.
Conclusion: Successful Legal Defense in Contractual Disputes
This case showcases our office’s expertise in handling complex contractual disputes, particularly those involving construction contracts and the resolution of financial disagreements. By relying on solid, legally binding documentation and a strategic defense approach, we successfully protected our client’s interests and secured a favorable outcome in court.
If you’re facing similar contractual issues, our team of legal experts is ready to provide guidance and representation to resolve disputes efficiently.
Contact US
Your Trusted Partner
Info@almadanilaw.com
