When she was so close to receive SR2 million in an inheritance by virtue of the verdict issued by Jeddah General Court, a Saudi female's case went back to square one – because her lawyer said some one impersonated her in a court appearance. The verdict obligated her brother to buy her SR5 million share of an inheritance and he paid her SR3 million when he was alive, but he died owing her SR2 million and her brother's wife refused to give her the money, said her lawyer, Fahd Muhammad Abo Hassan. “Despite the fact that there is real estate and property, the wife of the deceased has refused to pay the remaining amount to my client,” he said. “When I went to the Civil Status to follow up the case, I found out that it had transferred my client's case to the General Court because it is an inheritance case. When I went to the judge in charge to inquire about the case, he decided to first send a letter to the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency to ask if the deceased, my client's brother, had any bank accounts that can be seized.” The reply was that there was no balance in the deceased's accounts so “the judge should have seized the property of the deceased and given my client her financial rights,” Abo Hassan said. “However, the judge transferred the case back to the judge who issued the first verdict and asked him to look into it. So much time was lost in procedures during this period and the judge who issued the verdict moved to Madina.” Abo Hassan said this procedure was incorrect. “The judge in charge said that these procedures were taken at my client's request after she asked him to implement the condition stipulating that the whole case should go back to square one if money due has not been paid,” the lawyer said. The lawyer denied all this and said someone impersonated his client. “This is not true,” he said. “My client did not ask the judge to implement the condition. I protested before the judge and submitted a letter of protest, but he ignored the letter and the whole case instead of ordering a probe to discover the identity of the woman who pretended to be my client and asked the judge to implement the condition.” Abo Hassan said the judge in charge should have seized the property first and halted any disposal of it until the procedures the judge deems fit are completed. __
