Judicial principles and studies
Annulment of a Sale Contract: Article 13 of the Real Property Ownership Law
The study outlines limits on an appellate court's joinder of defendants to assess compensation under the cited provisions, affirms the injured party's civil right to sue after dismissal of public prosecution and use criminal-case evidence, and clarifies the scope of the 'causing party'.
Crime and penalties
Judicial principles and studies
Updated: 10 September 2026
Editorial summary of a judicial principle or decision; consult the source below and do not treat the firm as the author of the decision.
Smart reading summary
Understand and share the study quickly
The study outlines limits on an appellate court's joinder of defendants to assess compensation under the cited provisions, affirms the injured party's civil right to sue after dismissal of public prosecution and use criminal-case evidence, and clarifies the scope of the 'causing party'.
Key points
- Subject
- Summary
- Practical significance
Useful for: Useful for initial reading and identifying questions that may need legal review.
This automatic summary is based on the published text. It is not legal advice and does not replace checking official sources and reviewing the facts with a qualified lawyer.
AI generation is optional and subject to Gemini usage limits. Do not send client data or attachments from this card.
Subject
This summary addresses three core issues: the limits on an appellate court invoking its power under Article (114/3/a) of the Civil Procedure Law to join defendants for the purpose of assessing compensation under Article 13 of the Real Property Ownership Law; the effect of dismissal of the public prosecution on an injured party’s civil compensation claim and the use of criminal-case evidence by civil courts; and the scope of the term "causing party" as covering those who initiated or caused damage to real property.
Summary
- An appellate court’s addition of defendants to examine compensation is conditional on those defendants having been previously impleaded in the court of first instance, so as not to bypass a stage of litigation. - Dismissal of the public (criminal) prosecution does not bar the injured person from bringing a civil claim for compensation; the civil court may rely on the evidence presented in the criminal case at any stage up to the dismissal. - The expression "causing party" in Article (13/b/2) is broad and includes anyone who carried out or caused the damaging act against real property; the causal party remains liable under Article 13, removing the need to apply Articles (257, 258) of the Civil Code to add the principal where the direct actor and the causer are joined. This is a general educational summary and not a judicial text or legal advice.
Practical significance
This is a general educational summary based on the points published in the official source. It does not replace the original material or a review by Ashraf Al-Khawaja before relying on it for any action.
Frequently asked questions
Subject?
This summary addresses three core issues: the limits on an appellate court invoking its power under Article (114/3/a) of the Civil Procedure Law to join defendants for the purpose of assessing compensation under Article 13 of the Real Property Ownership Law; the effect of dismissal of the public prosecution on an injured party’s civil compensation claim and the use of criminal-case evidence by civil courts; and the scope of the term "causing party" as covering those who initiated or caused damage to real property.
Summary?
- An appellate court’s addition of defendants to examine compensation is conditional on those defendants having been previously impleaded in the court of first instance, so as not to bypass a stage of litigation. - Dismissal of the public (criminal) prosecution does not bar the injured person from bringing a civil claim for compensation; the civil court may rely on the evidence presented in the criminal case at any stage up to the dismissal. - The expression "causing party" in Article (13/b/2) is broad and includes anyone who carried out or caused the damaging act against real property; the causal party remains liable under Article 13, removing the need to apply Articles (257, 258) of the Civil Code to add the principal where the direct actor and the causer are joined. This is a general educational summary and not a judicial text or legal advice.
Practical significance?
This is a general educational summary based on the points published in the official source. It does not replace the original material or a review by Ashraf Al-Khawaja before relying on it for any action.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.
Study collection
Real estate and leases
Browse the other studies in this subject through its dedicated topical section.
Open study collectionA related service path
Commercial and civil litigation
If this study is close to your matter, review the service scope and contact the firm to discuss the facts and documents.
Review the related serviceRelated Jordanian-law guides
Contextual links to related public guide routes; they remain limited to Jordanian law and do not replace matter review.