Article 302 of the Saudi Civil Transactions Law
المادة 302 من نظام المعاملات المدنية · الفرع الثالث: عدم سماع الدعوى بمرور الزمن (التقادم المانع من سماع الدعوى
The article sets out three cases that interrupt the period after which a claim is not heard: the debtor's acknowledgment, a court claim even before a court without jurisdiction, and any court procedure by which the creditor asserts his right.
Official text (Arabic)
This article has not been amended since the law was issued.
تنقطع مدة عدم سماع الدعوى في الحالات الآتية:
أ- إقرار المدين بالحق صراحةً أو ضمنًا.
ب- المطالبة القضائية، ولو كانت أمام محكمة غير مختصة.
ج- أي إجراءٍ قضائيٍّ آخر يقوم به الدائن للتمسك بحقه.
This is the official Arabic wording, the only legally binding version. We do not translate the law itself; the explanation below is ours. Official source: Bureau of Experts at the Council of Ministers
Article 302 explained in plain English
This article explains when the period after which a claim is not heard because of the passage of time is interrupted, that is, when something happens that cuts off the running of the period that was running against the creditor. It mentions three cases:
- The debtor's acknowledgment of the right, whether express, such as acknowledging the debt in writing, or implied, understood from his conduct.
- A court claim, that is, filing a lawsuit, which interrupts the period even if it was filed before a court without jurisdiction.
- Any other court procedure by which the creditor asserts his right.
Note that the second and third cases come from the creditor through a court procedure, while the first comes from the debtor himself through his acknowledgment.
This article is complemented by neighboring provisions: Article 301 deals with the case of several creditors of one debt, under which the bar on hearing the claim runs only against those of them who have no excuse, and Article 303 provides that the transfer of a right from one person to his successor does not interrupt the period, so the mere transfer of a right is not among the cases of interruption.
Knowing these cases matters for a creditor who fears the period may expire, and for a debtor who wants to know the effect of his conduct. To assess whether a particular act counts as an implied acknowledgment or an interrupting court procedure, it is advisable to consult a lawyer specializing in civil cases.
Practical example
Khaled borrowed a sum of money from his friend Fahd and did not repay it. Before the period was completed, Fahd filed a claim to recover it, and it then became clear that the court before which he filed lacked jurisdiction. Under this article, the period after which a claim is not heard is interrupted by this court claim despite the court's lack of jurisdiction.
Translated from our Arabic explanation with machine assistance. For guidance only; it does not replace advice from a lawyer on your situation.
How we write and review contentA question about Article 302 of Civil Transactions Law?
Describe what happened and specialist lawyers answer. You can write in English.
- Completely free
- Lawyers from the directory answer
- Your name stays hidden
Civil Litigation & Compensation lawyers: ask a specialist about your case
Describe your situation briefly and we'll suggest a lawyer who specialises in this law
Civil Litigation & Compensation lawyers
Lawyers who handle this kind of case
Dr. Ali Al-Rubaie Law Office and Ittihad Al-Asr Legal Company
Active contributor
Unwan Law Firm
Frequently asked questions about Article 302 of the Saudi Civil Transactions Law
Does filing a claim in a court without jurisdiction interrupt the limitation period?
Yes. The article provides that a court claim interrupts the period after which a claim is not heard even if it is before a court without jurisdiction.
Does the debtor's acknowledgment of the debt interrupt the limitation period?
Yes. The debtor's acknowledgment of the right, express or implied, is one of the cases of interruption of the period.
Does the transfer of a right from its holder to his successor interrupt the period?
No. Article 303 provides that the transfer of a right from one person to his successor does not interrupt the period after which a claim is not heard.
More articles on Limitation Periods
- Article 79
An action to annul a contract is not heard after one year from knowledge of its ground, or from attaining full capacity or the end of duress, nor after ten years from contracting except in the case of partial incapacity.
1- لا تسمع دعوى إبطال العقد إذا انقضت (سنة) من تاريخ العلم بسبب الإبطال، وإذا كان إبطال العقد لنقص الأهلية أو الإكراه فبانقضاء (سنة) من تاريخ اكتمال الأهلية أو
- Article 81
Any interested person may rely on the nullity of a void contract and the court rules on it of its own motion; ratification does not cure it, and an action on it is not heard after ten years, though it may be raised as a defense at any time.
1- إذا وقع العقد باطلًا جاز لكل ذي مصلحة أن يتمسك بالبطلان، وللمحكمة أن تقضي به من تلقاء نفسها، ولا يزول البطلان بالإجازة. 2- لا تسمع دعوى البطلان إذا انقضت (عش
- Article 143
A compensation claim for a harmful act is not heard after 3 years from knowledge of the damage and the person liable, nor after 10 years from its occurrence, with a special rule for a claim arising from a crime.
1- لا تُسمع دعوى التعويض الناشئة عن الفعل الضار بانقضاء (ثلاث) سنوات من تاريخ علم المتضرر بوقوع الضرر وبالمسؤول عنه. وفي جميع الأحوال لا تسمع الدعوى بانقضاء (عش
- Article 159
The article bars hearing claims for unjust enrichment, undue payment and unauthorized agency 3 years after the creditor learns of his right, and in all cases 10 years after the right arose.
لا تُسمع الدعوى الناشئة عن الإثراء بلا سبب أو دفع غير المستحق أو الفضالة بانقضاء (ثلاث) سنوات من تاريخ علم الدائن بحقه. وفي جميع الأحوال لا تُسمع الدعوى بانقضاء
- Article 188
The article sets the periods for the claim of non-enforceability: it is not heard one year after the creditor learns of its ground, nor in any case ten years after the date of the act.
لا تُسمع دعوى عدم نفاذ التصرف بانقضاء (سنة) من تاريخ علم الدائن بسبب عدم النفاذ، ولا تُسمع الدعوى في جميع الأحوال بانقضاء (عشر) سنوات من تاريخ التصرف.
- Article 230
The Article provides that non-hearing of a claim due to lapse of time as to one jointly liable debtor benefits the others only to the extent of his share, and that suspension or interruption of the period for one cannot be asserted against the others.
1- لا يفيد عدم سماع الدعوى لمرور الزمن بالنسبة إلى أحد المدينين المتضامنين باقي المدينين إلا بقدر حصة ذلك المدين. 2- ليس للدائن أن يتمسك بوقف سريان مرور الزمن أ
The texts are reproduced from the official website of the Bureau of Experts at the Council of Ministers for reference; where they differ, the officially published Arabic text prevails. This content is not legal advice.