Al Yamamah University law students analyze the evidentiary weight of email in a heavy equipment rental claim

The Law Club at Al Yamamah University, as part of the “Pleading Table” initiative, held a legal discussion about a claim for overdue rental fees for the lease of heavy equipment, heard by the Dammam Commercial Court between Al Nukhba Limited Company (plaintiff) and Al Raed Limited Company (defendant), and concluded with an order requiring the latter to pay SAR 121,081.21 representing the balance of the rental fees for two pieces of equipment for March and April 2024.

The discussion covered six areas: the debt at issue, email as evidence, Al Raed’s defense, the rental period and return of the equipment, an assessment of the judgment, and a general analysis.

The debt and evidence submitted
Ghaya Alosaimi@Ghaya Alosaimi opened the discussion by emphasizing that the debt was clear from the contract, invoices, and equipment handover records and email correspondence, noting that invoices alone are not sufficient proof unless supported by other evidence. Meanwhile, Maryam Al-Olaimi@مريم العليمي raised a question about the figures concerning the amount, since the rental fees for the equipment for the two months totaled SAR 100,000, and asked about the nature of the difference of approximately SAR 21,000, and whether it represented legal fees or compensation for damage to the equipment. She also explained that digital evidence under the Law of Evidence had shifted from being a presumption to independent evidence with the same legal status as writing, pursuant to Articles 53 and 54.

Email: the decisive evidence
Ryouf Al-Suwailim@Ryouf Alsewailim said that email was the evidence that decided the case and shifted the burden of proof, as it contained an admission by the defendant Al Raed of the amount and a promise to pay, relying on Articles 55 and 58 of the Law of Evidence. Faisal Al-Mousa@فيصل الموسى agreed, noting that the email was not ordinary correspondence, but an admission that undermined the defendant’s denial of the invoices and complemented the contract. Nawaf also noted that the court relied on this admission as a primary basis in its reasoning to establish the defendant’s outstanding liability.

Al Raed’s defense
Alhanouf Al-Ajlan@الهنوف العجلان explained that the claim of payment required stronger proof, such as a bank transfer or a payment receipt or account statement, and that the company could have built a stronger defense than mere denial. Khalid Al-Barqawi@khalid Albargawi, agreed, explaining that the main weakness lay in relying on denial without countervailing evidence, and that submitting a receipt or bank transfer would have been enough to change the course of the case. Waad Al-Otaibi@Waad Alotaibi added that proof depends on documents, not statements, emphasizing the importance of accurate recordkeeping.

How could the dispute have been avoided?
Khalid Al-Barqawi@khalid Albargawi suggested preparing a settlement record and a final account reconciliation signed by both parties at the end of the lease, setting out the date the equipment was returned and its condition, the amounts paid and outstanding, along with issuing a formal demand and allowing time for payment before going to court.

The most influential factor
Opinions differed on the factor with the greatest impact; Ghaya Alosaimi@Ghaya Alosaimi considered it to be the email combined with the failure to prove payment, while Alhanouf Al-Ajlan@الهنوف العجلان considered it to be Al Raed’s position on payment. As for Ryouf Al-Suwailim@Ryouf Alsewailim she considered the email and the company’s position to be “the two sides of the scales,” citing Article 67, which provides that what is established in writing cannot be rebutted except by written evidence.

In a discussion about the independent status of digital evidence, Ryouf Al-Suwailim@Ryouf Alsewailim and Ghaya Alosaimi@Ghaya Alosaimi agreed that an email containing an explicit admission constitutes independent evidence in its own right, although its strength in this case was doubled by its consistency with the contract and invoices.

Khalid Al-Barqawi@khalid Albargawi concluded the discussion by emphasizing that the absence of counterevidence gave the plaintiff’s evidence conclusive force, calling for greater awareness of the importance of settlement and solutions that protect the rights of all parties rather than reducing the dispute to winning or losing.