The Dubai Civil Court has ordered a man to pay more than Dh4.7 million to an investor whose gold and cryptocurrency holdings he misappropriated, following a criminal conviction for breach of trust that had already become final.
The civil court’s order breaks down as Dh4.4 million representing the value of the misappropriated assets and a further Dh300,000 in compensation for damages. The defendant was also ordered to pay legal interest on those amounts, plus court fees and expenses.
Criminal conviction preceded the civil award
The case began with criminal proceedings before the Dubai Misdemeanours and Violations Court, which convicted the defendant of breach of trust. That court sentenced him to three years in prison, fined him Dh4.4 million, and ordered his deportation from the UAE.
The criminal judgment subsequently became final. The investor then filed a civil lawsuit seeking restitution of the assets’ value and compensation for losses.
In its ruling, the civil court said the finalised criminal judgment had conclusively established that the defendant committed the offence and misappropriated assets belonging to the investor. Because criminal responsibility had been settled, the civil court’s role was limited to assessing the financial damage and determining what the investor was owed.
The arrangement between the parties was an agency agreement, under which the defendant had been entrusted with assets including six kilograms of gold and an unspecified amount of cryptocurrency.
The legal framework behind the ruling
The breach of trust charge falls under Article 453 of the UAE Federal Decree-Law No. 31 of 2021, the Crimes and Penalties Law. That provision covers the embezzlement, use, or dissipation of funds or other movables entrusted under contracts including deposit, lease, mortgage, or agency. An agent is expressly classified as a fiduciary in relation to the principal’s property under this article.
The law sets the maximum fine in misdemeanour cases at Dh5,000,000 and the minimum at Dh1,000. The Dh4.4 million criminal fine imposed in this case sits within that range.
On the deportation order, Article 126 of the same law provides that a foreigner sentenced to a freedom-restricting penalty for a misdemeanour may be deported at the court’s discretion, or have deportation substituted for the custodial sentence, unless the law provides otherwise.
The principle applied by the civil court is established practice in UAE proceedings: findings embedded in a final criminal judgment bind the civil court considering compensation arising from the same offence. Civil proceedings then focus solely on quantifying the harm, not re-litigating guilt.
Dubai Courts published 19,329 judicial rulings in 2024, according to the Dubai Judicial Authority Annual Report for 2024. The Public Prosecution issued 41,457 smart criminal judgments in the same period and achieved a 95.7% timely execution rate for criminal judgments.
The defendant, whose nationality was not specified in the case records, faces three years’ imprisonment before deportation takes effect, with the civil award adding a separate financial obligation on top of the criminal fine already imposed.
