SAUDI ARABIA Law and Practice Contributed by: Saud AlRomi, Mostafa Ihab and Saleh Elbadry, Mohammed AlDhabaan & Partners Eversheds Sutherland
defendant again fails to appear without an acceptable excuse, the court rules on the merits, and the judg - ment is deemed in absentia. In practice, court notifications in Saudi Arabia are now issued electronically to the mobile number registered with the Ministry of Interior linked to the defendant’s national ID, which is treated as personal notification. This means that where the defendant is identifiable, notification is largely automatic – and a defendant’s failure to appear will typically result in the court pro - ceeding to judgment on the merits without the in Saudi procedural law does not have a mechanism equivalent to summary judgment for a wholly unmeri - torious defence. The court considers the merits of all cases brought before it. 2.7 Rules for Pleading Fraud Saudi law does not prescribe special rules for plead - ing fraud. The general evidential framework under the Evidence Law applies – a claimant bears the burden of proof and facts must be relevant, material and admis - sible. There is no heightened pleading standard spe - cific to fraud allegations and no professional conduct rules requiring a threshold of evidence before assert - ing fraud. 2.8 Claims Against “Unknown” Fraudsters Saudi civil procedural law requires the defendant to be identified in the statement of claim under Article 41 of the Civil Procedure Law. Bringing a civil claim against a truly unknown defendant is therefore not straightforward under the civil framework. absentia classification. Unmeritorious Defence The more practical route is the criminal process. The public prosecution has broad investigative powers to identify perpetrators. Once the fraudster is identified, the victim may assert their private right claim within the criminal proceedings under Article 69 of the Crimi - nal Procedure Law. 2.9 Compelling Witnesses to Give Evidence Civil Proceedings Under Article 72 (3) of the Evidence Law, the court may on its own motion or at the request of a litigant
summon any person whose testimony it deems nec - essary. Under Article 81 of the Evidence Law, a party who fears losing the opportunity to bring a witness may request a summary case to hear that testimony before substantive proceedings commence. Criminal Proceedings Under Article 165 of the Criminal Procedure Law, any person summoned to testify pursuant to a judge’s order must appear at the designated time and place. Under Article 116 of the Implementing Regulations of the Criminal Procedure Law, if a witness fails to appear without an acceptable excuse, the court may summon them by any means it deems fit. 3. Corporate Entities, Ultimate Beneficial Owners and Shareholders 3.1 Imposing Liability for Fraud on a Corporate Entity Civil Liability Under Article 28 of the Companies Law, which applies across all company types, managers and board mem - bers are jointly and severally liable for any damage caused to the company, its partners, shareholders or third parties arising from wrongful acts, negligence or omission in the performance of their duties. A com - pany is bound by the acts of its managers and board members carried out within the scope of their author - ity and the company’s purposes. Additionally, under Article 129 (2) of the CTL, a corporate employer is liable for harm caused by a subordinate during the course of their work. Criminal Liability of Individuals Several criminal laws directly target individuals act - ing within or on behalf of a company. Under Article 260 of the Companies Law, managers, officers, board members, auditors and liquidators who intentionally falsify financial statements or misuse company funds face up to three years’ imprisonment and/or a fine of up to SAR5 million. Criminal Liability of the Company Itself Multiple laws extend criminal liability to the corporate entity. Under Article 31 of the Anti-Money Laundering Law, a legal person that commits a money laundering
293 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook