Cassation No. 837 of 2019 (Administrative)
Issued on 13/04/2020
Panel: Chief Judge/Mohammed Abdul Rahman Al Jarrah - Head of the Chamber - and Counsellors/ Judges/Dr. Ahmed Al Sayegh and Abdulhaq Ahmed Yamin.
1- Definition of annulment lawsuit.
2- The plaintiff shall have a personal interest on which the decision has a direct effect.
3- Should there be no individual administrative decision, the lawsuit shall be dismissed.
4- The contested judgment ruling to dismiss the lawsuit for annulment of a ministerial decision shall be deemed valid as the Appellant’s request was limited to the annulment of a ministerial decision regarding the Implementing Regulation of the Law Regulating the Legal Profession without having challenged the lawsuit for annulment of an individual decision implementing it.
Lawsuit “its annulment”. Administrative Decision “its annulment”. Implementing Regulation of the Law on the Legal Profession. Judgment “Acceptable causation”. Cassation “of rejected reasons”.
- An annulment lawsuit aims at contesting an administrative decision, whether individual or regulatory, to reveal its deficiencies. The plaintiff shall have a personal interest on which the decision has a direct effect by having canceled or modified his legal status.
Further, although a general regulatory decision may be contested; however, in such case an individual decision issued in implementation of said regulatory decision shall be contested. Should there be no individual decision, the lawsuit shall be dismissed.
- The Appellant’s request was limited to the annulment of the ministerial decision regarding the Implementing Regulation of the Law Regulating the Legal Profession without having challenged the lawsuit for annulment of an individual decision implementing it. Its effect: rejection of his lawsuit.
- Example of defective causation.
Whereas it is prescribed by jurisprudence and administrative justice that an annulment lawsuit aims at contesting an administrative decision, whether individual or regulatory, to reveal its deficiencies, and this requires the plaintiff to have a personal interest on which the decision has a direct effect, i.e., by having canceled or modified the legal status of the concerned person. Further, although a general regulatory decision may be contested; however, in such case an individual decision issued in implementation of said regulatory decision shall be contested. Should there be no individual decision, the lawsuit shall be dismissed. Based on the aforementioned, whereas the Appellant’s request was limited to the annulment of Ministerial Decision No. 972 of 2017 regarding the Implementing Regulation of the Law Regulating the Legal Profession without having challenged a lawsuit concerning the regulatory rules contained in said decision in implementation of the original law, which means that the Appellant has no interest in the annulment of the contested decision; and whereas the contested decision ruled to dismiss the lawsuit, thus it shall be deemed well-founded in law as to the conclusion reached thereby, and then objecting to it shall be deemed groundless; and accordingly the appeal shall be rejected.
The court,
Whereas in the facts as apparent in the contested judgment and all documents of the Appeal, the Appellant has filed Lawsuit No. 318 of 2017 (administrative – plenary) to request the annulment of Decision of the Minister of Justice No. 972 of 2017 on the Implementing Regulation of Federal Law No. 23 of 1991 Regulating the Legal Profession; and by way of explanation of his lawsuit, he stated that he is a licensed lawyer authorised to plead before the courts of the State in all stages of litigation, and he was surprised by the issuance of Ministerial Decision No. 972 of 2017 on the Implementing Regulation of the Law Regulating the Legal Profession, and that the aforementioned Regulation has violated some of the provisions prescribed in the Law, which is deemed as violation of the Constitution and the Civil Transactions Law, and it would be impossible to implement some of the articles in factual and legal terms, in addition to the fact that the entity having issued the decision has no competence over the matter; thus the lawsuit was filed. Moreover, the Court of First Instance has ruled in the session dated 29/5/2018 to reject the lawsuit. The Appellant has filed an appeal against that ruling under No. 131 of 2018. Abu Dhabi Court Federal Appeal Court has ruled on 29/10/2019 to annul the first-instance judgment and ruled once again to dismiss the Lawsuit, thus the appeal was filed and was brought before the present Court in the deliberation room, where it decided to hear same in a session, and today’s session was set for a sentencing hearing.
Whereas it is prescribed by jurisprudence and administrative justice that an annulment lawsuit aims at contesting an administrative decision, whether individual or regulatory,
to reveal its deficiencies, and this requires the plaintiff to have a personal interest on which the decision has a direct effect, i.e., by having canceled or modified the legal status of the concerned person.
Further, although a general regulatory decision may be contested; however, in such case an individual decision issued in implementation of said regulatory decision shall be contested. Should there be no individual decision, the lawsuit shall be dismissed.
Based on the aforementioned, whereas the Appellant’s request was limited to the annulment of Ministerial Decision No. 972 of 2017 regarding the Implementing Regulation of the Law Regulating the Legal Profession without having challenged a lawsuit concerning the regulatory rules contained in said decision in implementation of the original law, which means that the Appellant has no interest in the annulment of the contested decision; and whereas the contested decision ruled to dismiss the lawsuit, thus it shall be deemed well-founded in law as to the conclusion reached thereby, and then objecting to it shall be deemed groundless; and accordingly the appeal shall be rejected.

* * *