SCA 4530570047/2024
This was involved non-payment for purchased goods where there had been an admission of debt by electronic communication. A key issue was the procedural validity and whether there was a link between various separate purchase orders which would allow them to be dealt with in one case.
Background
This case concerns a commercial dispute between a supplier of office furniture and a construction company on payment for goods delivered on credit. The claimant sought to recover a total amount of 91,557.60 SAR for the supply of office furniture, along with an additional 10,000 SAR as compensation for litigation-related damages. The dispute arose because the defendant had allegedly failed to pay for the delivered goods despite acknowledging receipt and promising multiple times to settle the outstanding amounts. The claimant submitted supporting evidence, including WhatsApp communications with the defendant and an account statement confirming the amount owed. However, the defendant contested the claim, arguing that there was no formal proof of delivery or consolidated contract covering all purchase orders.