Category: Intel

The Supreme Court held that the failure of the employer to impose a disciplinary punishment against an employee after the expiry of the deadlines stipulated by the Labour Law rendered the action taken by the employer against the violating employee illegal.

An Omani employee was terminated from his job for insulting a manager in the presence of other employees. He sued his employer for unfair dismissal and demanded compensation. The Supreme Court ruled that the termination of employment was valid, emphasising that any form of assault affecting a person’s dignity is deemed grievous under article 40(8) of the Labour Law of 2003.

An Omani employee working on a 2-week on 2-week off rotational system sued his employer for refusing to compensate him for working during national holidays. The Supreme Court ruled that he was not entitled to compensation on the grounds that the working system of the employer, in terms of working hours and working days, was more favourable overall than the system prescribed by the Labour Law, and therefore, the failure to compensate the worker for the national day holidays is not deemed a valuation.

The Supreme Court held that the issue of the reliability of a translation accepted by the Court of Appeal in the procedures of the trial is a substantive matter that cannot be contested before the Supreme Court.

A debtor obtained a loan from a bank without disclosing that he was permanently totally disabled. The bank insured the loan after it was given. The court held that the insurer was not responsible for the repayment of the loan because the accident that caused the disability took place before the term of the policy, and the debtor was ordered to repay the loan in full with interest.

The Supreme Court held that the suspension of commercial activity as a punishment imposed on a company is justified even if the conduct was carried out by a natural person acting in the name of the company. However, this suspension must only be imposed in regard to activities relating to the crime and not all the activities of the company.

The Public Prosecution sued an employer as a criminal action for failing to compensate employees on a 2-week on 2-week off rotation work system for working on official holidays and rest days. The court held that criminal convictions require a high standard for establishing an offence, and depriving employees of national holidays and rest days can be justified in the overall package offered through the 2-week on 2-week off rotational system if it is more advantageous to employees.

In a dispute between a bank and a corporate client, the Supreme Court held that the standard terms and conditions of the contract signed between a bank and this corporate client do not fulfil the characteristics of an adhesion contract, and therefore these terms and conditions cannot be set aside on this ground.

A Twitter user was accused of violating the Cybercrime Law by insulting agents of a falaj for their role in depriving a public park of water, which led to the deterioration of the conditions of the park. The Supreme Court ruled that the competing intentions of the perpetrator (protecting public interest vs insulting certain individuals) must be weighed against each other when determining if a crime has taken place. In this case, the Supreme Court refused to overturn the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Nizwa finding him not guilty on the basis that the public interest intention outweighed the insult intention.

The Supreme Court confirmed the invalidation of a new trade mark registration due to its similarity to an existing registration. In deciding if the trade marks are similar, the Supreme Court held that one must look at the collective elements of the mark and not individual elements.