The Game of Letters and Numbers: How a “Data Discrepancy” Led to a AED 100,000 Fine.

Practice Area: Criminal Law / Commercial Law – Cheque Fraud

Outcome: In a clear and firm ruling, the Court of Cassation confirmed that the mere act of drafting a cheque in a way that obstructs its payment is enough to hold the issuer fully responsible. A cheque is a protected payment instrument, and anyone who tampers with it bears full criminal liability. The court upheld the AED 100,000 fine and ordered the confiscation of the security deposit.

The Facts

In the world of finance and business, some believe that minor manipulation of a cheque’s details may constitute a “clever loophole” or merely a “precautionary measure.” However, the Court of Cassation has drawn a clear line, affirming that a cheque is not just a piece of paper, but a payment instrument protected by law.

The events of this case began when a woman (the defendant) issued a cheque in favor of a beneficiary. The surprise came at the bank counter, where the cheque was rejected due to a deliberately engineered “technical defect.” The drawer had intentionally written the amount in figures differently from the amount written in words a tactic that legally prevents the bank from honoring the cheque, thereby stripping it of its essential function as a means of payment.

The Public Prosecution considered this discrepancy not a mere formal error, but a deliberate act amounting to a criminal offense. The defendant was charged with intentionally issuing or signing a cheque in a manner that prevents its payment. The Court of Misdemeanors initially fined her AED 200,000. Upon appeal, the Court of Appeal reduced the penalty to AED 100,000. Dissatisfied with this outcome, the defendant challenged the judgment before the Court of Cassation.

The Defendant’s Arguments Before the Court of Cassation

The appellant argued that the numerical amounts on the cheque were mathematically identical despite the difference in wording, and that the instrument was not intended as a means of payment but rather as a security cheque linked to commercial transactions. She also denied committing the act, claiming that the charge was fabricated against her, and maintained that her defenses had not been given due consideration, thereby warranting the annulment of the judgment.

The Court of Cassation’s Ruling and Legal Opinion

The Court of Cassation dismissed the appeal, holding that criminal intent in the offense of issuing a cheque in a manner that prevents its payment is established by the mere deliberate act of drafting the cheque in a way that obstructs its encashment, irrespective of the purpose for which it was issued or whether it was described as a security cheque.

The Court further ruled that allegations of fabrication or claims that the cheque was issued as security do not constitute valid grounds for justification or exemption from criminal liability. Accordingly, the Court ordered the confiscation of the security deposit and upheld the fine of AED 100,000.

Legal Conclusion

Criminal intent in the offense of issuing a cheque that prevents payment is a general intent, satisfied by the deliberate act of drafting the cheque in a way that hinders its encashment, without the need to prove an intent to cause harm. A judgment is deemed legally sound when it sufficiently sets out the facts, elements of the offense, and supporting evidence, regardless of the form of its reasoning. The Court also reaffirmed that labeling a cheque as a “security cheque” does not absolve its issuer of criminal liability once the elements of the crime are established.