The court had established its ruling on the grounds of the expert report which confirmed that the appellants were not damaged materially by the mistake of the two litigants.

The court said that the first appellant was a company that had a legal personality and therefore it could not be affected by a moral damage as a result for the mistake of the litigants. The court said that the documents of the case also revealed that the moral damage of the second appellant due to the arrest by the police was not a result of the second litigant's action. The court said that the court had dismissed the appellants' request for referring the case to investigation because the documents of the case and evidence were sufficient to establish the ruling. The court said that the appellants' defence that they deserved temporary compensation for moral damage was therefore irrelevant in this regard.

The court dismissed the appeal.