A claimant filed a case against defendants before the court. He requested the court appoint an expert in order to calculate the amounts of money he had paid to cover the debts of the defendants' father and order the first defendants to pay these amounts accordingly.

The court refused to consider the case because it was formerly settled.

The claimant appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the appealed ruling.

The claimant appealed the ruling before the court of cassation. He said in his grounds of appeal that the appealed ruling had erred in the application of law and had insufficient evidence of causation. He said that the court established its ruling on the grounds that the requests of the current and the previous cases were the same. He said that the requests of the current case were different from the ones in the previous case.