Imagine you lent a friend a large sum on trust and without a document, then they denied the debt. Or you closed an important deal with a verbal agreement and a handshake, then the other party reneged. Here you discover a harsh truth: you may not be able to prove your right through witnesses, however honest they are. The Law of Evidence set a clear rule determining when a transaction must be in writing, and when witness testimony fails as evidence. Here is a practical guide to this rule and its limits.
The basic rule: the SAR 100,000 threshold
The text is clear: every transaction exceeding one hundred thousand riyals (or its equivalent) in value, or of undetermined value, must be proven in writing. And most importantly: witness testimony is not accepted to prove the existence or extinction of such transactions, unless an agreement or provision states otherwise.
In practical terms: if the value of your dealing exceeds one hundred thousand riyals, writing is not an option — it is a necessity to prove it. Witnesses alone will not suffice.
How is the value calculated?
The law is precise in calculation: the obligation's value is assessed by its value at the time the transaction was made, without adding accessories to the principal. That is, what counts is the value of the original dealing at the time of conclusion, not what may later be added in interest or expenses.
An important point: in proving partial payment, what counts is the value of the original obligation — so if the original debt was 150,000 and you paid 40,000 of it, proving this payment is subject to the writing rule because the principal exceeds the threshold.
An important practical point on multiple claims
If your case includes multiple claims arising from different sources, proof by testimony is permitted for each claim not exceeding one hundred thousand riyals — even if their total exceeds this threshold. What counts is the value of each claim separately, not the total.
Cases where testimony is not accepted even below the threshold
Even if your dealing is below one hundred thousand riyals, there are cases where testimony does not suffice:
First, for matters the law requires to be in writing for their validity or proof (such as certain transactions requiring a special form). Second, if what is sought is the remainder or part of a right that can only be proven in writing. Third, for what contradicts or exceeds what a written instrument contains — that is, you cannot use testimony to contradict a written contract or add to it.
Exceptions that save your position: when is testimony accepted despite exceeding the threshold?
The law is fair and did not close the door entirely. Testimony is accepted for what should have been proven in writing in three cases:
1. A beginning of proof in writing: if there is a writing issued by the opponent that makes the existence of the claimed transaction probable — even if it is not a complete contract. Such as a message, receipt, or written partial acknowledgment. Here testimony is accepted to bolster this writing.
2. A material or moral impediment: if an impediment existed preventing the obtaining of written evidence. A material impediment, such as no one being available to write, or the claimant being a third party who was not in the contract. A moral impediment, such as the marital bond, and kinship and affinity up to the fourth degree — for it is difficult to ask your father or wife for a written deed.
3. Loss of the written evidence: if it is established that the claimant lost their written evidence for a reason beyond their control (such as fire, theft, or disaster).
Why is this exception important?
The moral impediment among relatives is a genuine safety net. Many family disputes over loans or dealings occur on the basis of trust without documentation. The law recognizes this reality and allows them to be proven by testimony — but do not rely on this exception as a rule, since proving it may itself be difficult.
The practical lesson
The rule is simple and decisive: above one hundred thousand riyals, do not rely on trust or witnesses — write. A simple contract, or even a WhatsApp message or email documenting the essential details, may be the difference between recovering your right and losing it. Writing does not require complex legal drafting — it only needs to document: who, what, how much, and when.
Conclusion
Witness testimony is not the magic solution many think it is. In large dealings, writing is the king of evidence. The golden rule: do not conclude a dealing exceeding one hundred thousand riyals without a written trace — even if the other party is the closest person to you. Documentation is not mistrust, but protection for both parties.
How does LEXIUM help?
We review your dealings and determine which need written documentation to protect your right, and help you draft what proves your position. And if you are in an existing dispute, we assess whether your evidence is sufficient or whether one of the exceptions applies to your case.
Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. See our full disclaimer.