Case studiesCriminal defence2025
Seized truck ordered released to its owner, a company not accused
Al Faisal acted for a company whose rented-out truck was still held after a criminal case against other people; we were instructed after the judgment. On our request, the court ordered the seizure lifted within about a week of filing, and wrote to the traffic department to hand the truck to the company.
Handled by Faysel Al-Mohannadi
The judgment
- Result
- Release request granted. The seizure on the truck ordered lifted, and the traffic department told to hand it to the company.
- Court
- Court of First Instance (criminal, misdemeanours)
- Time
- About two months, from our instruction to the court's letter to the traffic department
- What was at stake
- The company's truck, held on a case to which the company was never a party
- Our client
- A small trading and services company, the truck's owner. It was not accused.
The case
Our client, a small trading and services company, owned a truck. In 2024 it rented the truck to an individual under a short written contract. The contract made the renter fully responsible for accidents and for any illegal activity.
That year the truck was seized in an environmental misdemeanour case against other people. The company was not accused, and it was not a party to the case. The court gave judgment later in 2024, and the truck stayed held on the case.
The company instructed Al Faisal in 2025.
What was at stake
The company had never been a party to the case or been heard in it. Yet the judgment had been given, and its truck was still held.
Losing meant the truck would stay held. If a confiscation order had reached the truck, the company could have lost it for good.
What we did
Asked for the company to be allowed to appeal as the owner.We were instructed in 2025, after the judgment, so our work began there. We first asked the court to allow the company to appeal the judgment as the owner it affected. The company had never been a party or been heard, and the request relied on its property rights and the right of defence.
Filed a short request to release the truck.About a month after we were instructed, we filed a direct release request through the court's e-services, to the first-instance criminal chamber. It set out that the company had rented the truck out under a written contract, was not a party to the case, and did not know how the renter would use the truck.
Proved ownership and standing on paper.We attached the registration in the company's name, the rental contract with its clause putting liability for illegal use on the renter, the company's commercial registration and establishment card, and its owners' IDs.
What the court held
The court granted the release request within about a week of filing and ordered the seizure on the truck lifted. Its order gave no reasons beyond answering the request. It then wrote to the traffic department to lift the seizure and hand the truck over to the company.
Neither the company's request nor the court's order cites an article of law. The request rested on ownership and on the company's lack of knowledge.
Why this result matters
A company that was never accused still had its truck held after the judgment. A short request, backed by ownership papers and a written rental contract, brought a release order within about a week of filing.
If you are in a similar position
- If you rent out vehicles, use a written contract that puts liability for illegal use on the renter, and attach a copy of the renter's ID.
- If your vehicle is held in someone else's case, consider a direct request for its release, with the registration, the rental contract and your company papers.
- Check early whether the judgment confiscated the vehicle or only kept it seized. That decides whether to ask for release or to challenge the judgment.
Who handled it
Faysel Al-Mohannadilawyer admitted before the Court of Cassation
Your vehicle is held in a case against someone else? Bring the registration, the rental contract and your company papers.