Latest news with #MohammedAlMahdi
Gulf Insider
3 days ago
- Business
- Gulf Insider
Bahrain: Heirs Of Late Labour Supplier Win BD21,243 In Court After Company Refuses To Pay
The heirs of a labour supplier who died before collecting payment for services have secured a BD21,243 court ruling, after a company refused to pay and argued the contract had no legal standing. The case dates back to an agreement made while the supplier was alive, under which he provided workers for mechanical and civil works. The company accepted the terms, which included payment within 15 days of invoicing, based on attendance records signed by both parties. The workers were supplied as agreed, but after the supplier's death, the company stopped payment. The heirs filed a lawsuit, represented by lawyer Mohammed Al Mahdi, who presented signed timesheets and other documentation proving the workers had reported to the job site. A court-appointed accounting expert reviewed the records and confirmed the company owed BD21,258. The court ruled in favour of the heirs, ordering the company to pay BD21,243 — to be distributed among the heirs according to their legal shares. It also directed the company to cover legal expenses and lawyer's fees. The company appealed, claiming the agreement was invalid because the supplier did not hold a Labour Market Regulatory Authority (LMRA) licence, as required for labour recruitment. It also alleged the contract was forged. However, the Appeals Court dismissed both claims. It ruled that a clear business relationship existed between the two parties and that the dispute was over non-payment, not the validity of the arrangement. As for the forgery claim, the court noted the company had failed to provide its own timecards, despite the expert basing calculations on them. The court rejected the appeal and upheld the original ruling, again ordering the company to pay the amount due.
Daily Tribune
3 days ago
- Business
- Daily Tribune
Heirs of late labour supplier win BD21,243 in court after company refuses to pay
The heirs of a labour supplier who died before collecting payment for services have secured a BD21,243 court ruling, after a company refused to pay and argued the contract had no legal standing. The case dates back to an agreement made while the supplier was alive, under which he provided workers for mechanical and civil works. The company accepted the terms, which included payment within 15 days of invoicing, based on attendance records signed by both parties. The workers were supplied as agreed, but after the supplier's death, the company stopped payment. The heirs filed a lawsuit, represented by lawyer Mohammed Al Mahdi, who presented signed timesheets and other documentation proving the workers had reported to the job site. A court-appointed accounting expert reviewed the records and confirmed the company owed BD21,258. The court ruled in favour of the heirs, ordering the company to pay BD21,243 — to be distributed among the heirs according to their legal shares. It also directed the company to cover legal expenses and lawyer's fees. The company appealed, claiming the agreement was invalid because the supplier did not hold a Labour Market Regulatory Authority (LMRA) licence, as required for labour recruitment. It also alleged the contract was forged. However, the Appeals Court dismissed both claims. It ruled that a clear business relationship existed between the two parties and that the dispute was over non-payment, not the validity of the arrangement. As for the forgery claim, the court noted the company had failed to provide its own timecards, despite the expert basing calculations on them. The court rejected the appeal and upheld the original ruling, again ordering the company to pay the amount due.
Gulf Insider
24-05-2025
- Gulf Insider
Bahrain: Mining Rig Deal Goes Bust, Court Orders BD10,000 Refund
A protracted court battle over an undelivered cryptocurrency mining rig ended with the High Civil Court ordering the seller to refund around BD10,000. The incident leading to the case started three years ago when the victim ordered a cryptocurrency mining machine from a woman for BD9,970. However, the deal signed in December 2021 was never fulfilled, where the machine was originally promised to be delivered in February the following year. A receipt, dated and signed and bearing the stamp of her sole proprietorship, confirmed the sum had changed hands. According to the claimant's lawyer, Mohammed Al Mahdi, his client waited well past the deadline before sending a notice asking for the machine. There was no reply. He then took the matter to the Consumer Protection Directorate, which referred the case to the Public Prosecution. Representative picture The woman was fined BD1,000 under a criminal order. She objected. Her objection was dismissed by the Lower Criminal Court, which upheld the fine. The buyer submitted the ruling along with records of the deal as part of the civil claim. In its judgment, the court said the criminal order, having gone unchallenged within the legal time frame, carried weight in civil proceedings. The facts, it said, were settled. The machine was neither delivered nor refunded, and the evidence was clear. The woman had not disputed the receipt or the amount. The court ruled she must pay back BD9,970 and cover the cost of the case, including legal fees.
Daily Tribune
24-05-2025
- Daily Tribune
Mining rig deal goes bust: Court orders BD10,000 refund
A protracted court battle over an undelivered cryptocurrency mining rig ended with the High Civil Court ordering the seller to refund around BD10,000. The incident leading to the case started three years ago when the victim ordered a cryptocurrency mining machine from a woman for BD9,970. However, the deal signed in December 2021 was never fulfilled, where the machine was originally promised to be delivered in February the following year. A receipt, dated and signed and bearing the stamp of her sole proprietorship, confirmed the sum had changed hands. According to the claimant's lawyer, Mohammed Al Mahdi, his client waited well past the deadline before sending a notice asking for the machine. There was no reply. He then took the matter to the Consumer Protection Directorate, which referred the case to the Public Prosecution. Representative picture The woman was fined BD1,000 under a criminal order. She objected. Her objection was dismissed by the Lower Criminal Court, which upheld the fine. The buyer submitted the ruling along with records of the deal as part of the civil claim. In its judgment, the court said the criminal order, having gone unchallenged within the legal time frame, carried weight in civil proceedings. The facts, it said, were settled. The machine was neither delivered nor refunded, and the evidence was clear. The woman had not disputed the receipt or the amount. The court ruled she must pay back BD9,970 and cover the cost of the case, including legal fees.
Gulf Insider
25-03-2025
- Business
- Gulf Insider
5 Bounced Cheques Leave Developer Owing BD22,500
Five bounced cheques have landed a real estate company and its owner with a BD22,500 court bill, tied to an unpaid land and equipment deal worth BD50,000. The High Commercial Court found that the firm had failed to pay the full sum agreed in a contract for the transfer of a plot and machinery. The defendants were ordered to cover the remaining amount, along with yearly interest of 4 per cent from the date the claim was filed, and to pay legal costs and court fees. Lawyer Mohammed Al Mahdi, representing the seller, said his client had agreed to hand over the land and equipment for BD50,000. Part of the money arrived. The rest did not. Balance To settle the balance, the company owner-named as the second defendant – wrote five cheques on behalf of the company, totalling BD22,500. When the seller presented them at the bank, all five were returned unpaid. That led to the legal action. The court examined the documents and found a signed contract between the seller and both the second and third defendants. It confirmed the transfer and the price. The signatures were not disputed. Letters The file also included two letters from the seller to the Jaafari Waqf Directorate. One asked that the remaining lease term for the plot be passed to the second defendant. The other requested a new lease agreement in the second defendant's name, following the transfer. The court concluded that a deal had been struck and that the two defendants had not kept their side of it. Also read: Bahrain Enforces Strict Cleanliness Law With Fines Up To BD 300
