Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 54

Summary: - Determination of social status for acquiring ownership. The relevant status is that existing from approval of the allocation until expiry of the period it specified, with the remaining other conditions fulfilled, without regard to any subsequent change in that status. The reason: such change falls outside the rules it prescribed for establishing the right to acquire ownership. - The family under the government housing distribution system in force from 26/8/1962. Its meaning: a group consisting of a husband, wife, and their children, or some of this group, living as one household. Its implication: each member of that group living separately from it falls outside the concept of the family. This must be observed when allocating these houses, whether upon their initial allocation or upon amendment of the allocation. - Allocation of the government house in dispute to the appellant and her mother, its delivery to them as constituting a Kuwaiti family during 1976, and their obtaining a loan secured by it from the Credit and Savings Bank for its expansion and renovation. Its implication: the appellant’s social status for acquiring ownership was determined from approval of the allocation. The issuance of Minister of State for Housing Affairs Decision No. 564/1993 requiring that the number of members of a family entitled to a government house be no fewer than two does not alter this. The reason: it cannot prejudice the appellant’s legal position, which became settled upon fulfillment of the conditions for her acquisition of ownership of the property in dispute. The challenged judgment’s departure from this view is a defect requiring its cassation. Rule: It is established in the jurisprudence of this Court that the general principle, under natural law, is respect for acquired rights, even if acquired through administrative, regulatory, or individual decisions. This is what justice dictates and the public interest requires, with a view to the stability of legal positions, which may not be prejudiced under the provisions of the Kuwaiti Constitution. Likewise, the relevant social status for acquiring ownership is that existing from approval of the allocation until expiry of the period it specified, with the remaining other conditions fulfilled, without regard to any subsequent change in that status, because such change falls outside the rules it prescribed for establishing the right to acquire ownership. The meaning of the family, under the government housing distribution system in force from 26/8/1962, is a group consisting of a husband, wife, and their children, or some of this group, living as one household. Consequently, each member of that group living separately from it falls outside the concept of the family. This concept must be observed when allocating these houses, whether upon their initial allocation or upon amendment of the allocation. That being so, and since the documents establish that the government house in dispute was allocated to the appellant and her mother on 19/7/1976 and delivered to them as constituting a Kuwaiti family, and that they obtained a loan secured by it from the Credit and Savings Bank on 30/6/1980 for expansion and renovation, the appellant’s social status for acquiring ownership was therefore determined from approval of the allocation. This is not altered by the issuance of Minister of State for Housing Affairs Decision No. 564/1993 requiring that the number of members of a family entitled to a government house be no fewer than two, since it cannot prejudice the appellant’s legal position, which became settled upon fulfillment of the conditions for her acquisition of ownership of the property in dispute, as explained above. Since the challenged judgment departed from this view and ruled to set aside the first-instance judgment and dismiss the appellant’s action on the basis that she did not meet the conditions for housing welfare, contrary to the provisions of the law, it is defective and must be quashed.