- The court is under an obligation to deliver a ruling that demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the facts and evidence pertinent to the case, showcasing discernment and thorough examination. This serves the purpose of providing assurance to the reader that the court has diligently explored all aspects within its jurisdiction to ascertain the truth. It is imperative for the court to meticulously assess the defence put forth by the opposing party, particularly when such a defence holds the potential to alter the court's stance on the case and is corroborated by pertinent supporting documents. Failure to undertake such meticulous evaluation renders the court's ruling susceptible to being characterised as displaying deficiencies in reasoning.

- Article 29 of the Law on Legal Profession prescribes that an attorney receives his fees pursuant to the terms delineated in the contract mutually agreed upon by the attorney and their client. The court that heard the case holds the authority, upon the client's request, to diminish the agreed-upon fees if it deems them excessive in relation to the effort expended on the case and the benefit accrued to the client. However, it is impermissible to reduce the fees if they were agreed upon subsequent to the completion of the legal services. In instances where there is an absence of a written agreement regarding the fees, or if the written agreement is deemed null and void, the court that adjudicated the case, in the event of a dispute and upon the plea of either the attorney or the client, is entrusted with the task of appraising the attorney's fees proportionate to the exerted effort and the benefit realised by the client.

(3) The client's dismissal of the attorney without legitimate reason.

- Article 33 of the Law on Legal Profession specifies that if a client terminates the services of their attorney without a valid justification after the initiation of the assigned tasks, the client is obliged to remit the entire agreed-upon fees, as if the attorney had successfully completed the assigned work for the client's benefit. In the event of termination occurring before the commencement of the assigned tasks, the attorney is entitled to fees for the efforts expended in preparation for the work, not exceeding 25% of the agreed-upon fees. In cases where there is no pre-existing agreement on fees, the methodology articulated in the third paragraph of Article 29 of the Law on Legal Profession shall be adhered to for the estimation of fees.

- An illustration of a deficiency in reasoning is evident in the contested ruling, which confirmed the appealed ruling by rejecting the request for attorney's fees as stipulated in the contract between the involved parties. The rationale provided for this rejection was based on the assertion that the lawsuit had been filed prematurely.

Whereas in the facts, as apparent pursuant to the perusal of the contested ruling and accompanying documents, the appellant initiated Suit [Number] - Civil - against the respondents, seeking a judicial determination on the validity and enforceability of provisional seizure No. 495/2020 - a summary order on a petition. The appellant further sought an order obligating the respondents to remit the sum of five hundred thousand dirhams, alongside legal interest at the rate of 12%, calculated from the date of the claim until full payment. The basis for the claim rested on the appellant's capacity as an attorney, having entered into an agreement with the first defendant on 7/7/2018 to represent and defend him in Case [Number], with the objective of pursuing labour benefits and compensation for a work-related injury in exchange for the agreed-upon remuneration. The appellant asserted that he fulfilled his obligations by diligently overseeing the case and attending its sessions for a span of one and a half years. Subsequently, it became apparent to him that the first defendant had initiated Case [Number] ‌‌Plenary Civil - along with its subsequent appeal [Number] and cassation appeal [Number] - Civil - involving the same litigants and subject matter. Notably, a ruling was rendered in those cases preceding the one assigned to him, resulting in the determination that the case under his purview could not be considered due to the previous ruling. The appellant, in the course of his legal representation, bore the costs of expert secretariat amounting to 3000 dirhams. Furthermore, in light of rulings against the remaining defendants in Case [Number] - ‌Plenary Civil - the appellant sought the imposition of provisional seizure on their bank accounts, limited to the claimed amount, leading to the initiation of the present lawsuit.

Following the response of the second to the fourth defendants, they introduced a new party, namely [Name] Metal Construction Contracting LLC, as a debtor to the first defendant for the amount awarded in Case [Number] ‌- Labour - and such amount was recorded in the general guarantee for the funds of the first respondent as a creditor of the party added to the proceedings.

In a session held on 9/8/2020, the court of first instance rendered a decision deeming the lawsuit as prematurely filed, leading the appellant to file Appeal [Number]. Concurrently, the appellant submitted a request for the inclusion of [Name] Metal Construction Contracting LLC as a party to the lawsuit in its capacity as a debtor to the first respondent with respect to Case [Number] - Plenary Labour - and the imposition upon it, along with the other respondents, jointly and severally, to remit the sum of 503,000 dirhams to the appellant, accompanied by legal interest.

In a session held on 4/5/2021, the Court of Appeal rendered a decision to accept the appeal in form, but on the merits, it was rejected, thereby confirming the appealed ruling. In response to this, the appellant filed the current cassation appeal. The appellant contends that the contested ruling violated the law and violated the documented facts by rejecting the case as prematurely filed. The appellant asserts that, during the session on 16/3/2021, they submitted a folder of documents, including a copy of the ruling issued in Appeal [Number] Civil Supreme - initiated by the respondent and rejecting the cassation. The appellant argues that this ruling, which concluded the case in which they represented the respondent, constitutes a final judgment. However, the contested ruling failed to acknowledge or respond to this crucial piece of documented evidence. Consequently, the appellant argues that the contested ruling not only breached the documented facts but also displayed deficiencies in reasoning. Therefore, the appellant seeks a reversal of the contested ruling.

This objection holds merits, since is prescribed, as per the ruling of this court, that the ruling shall incorporate elements assuring the reader that the court has thoroughly considered the factual intricacies of the case. Also, the ruling shall reflect the court's diligent efforts in utilising all available means to unearth the truth therein.

Furthermore, when either of the opposing parties raises a defence that, if substantiated, could impact the formation of the court's opinion and is supported by documentary evidence, it is imperative for the court to scrutinise this defence in light of the potential significance of such documents. Failure to conduct a thorough examination in these circumstances renders the court's ruling susceptible to being marred by deficiencies in reasoning.