Tag: Case and Fatwa Summary

The Ministry of Justice and Legal Affairs (MJLA) held that a contractor does not have the right to a variation order to obtain compensation from the Ministry of Transport, Communications, and Information Technology (MTCIT) for VAT paid in connection with a contract that was signed before the issue of the Value Added Tax Law.

The Ministry of Justice and Legal Affairs (MJLA) confirmed that the only government entity with the power to make an exemption from the payment of any royalty or fee due to the government is the Ministry of Finance. Ministries directly interfacing with contractors are not permitted to make exemptions from the payments of amounts due to the government, even for their own projects. This fatwa also highlights the risks that contractors face when relying on incorrect information formally communicated by government entities.

The Supreme Court confirmed that a PhD thesis is protected by copyright and that the the signing of research agreement for a component of the research between the PhD researcher and the university does not make the PhD thesis the property of the university.

In a contract that was signed before the entry into force of the Value Added Tax Law, the Ministry of Justice and Legal Affairs (MJLA) held that a contractor was required to pay VAT out of the contract value agreed with the Ministry of Health and that contractor had no basis for adding it as additional charge that the ministry owes to the contractor.

The Ministry of Justice and Legal Affairs (MJLA) held that individuals who have reached the lottery stage of the land allocation process are entitled to obtain a land even after the legislation that establishes the right for the entitlement to this land was repealed.

The Ministry of Justice and Legal Affairs (MJLA) determined that it is not permitted for an employee of a company in which the government owns shares exceeding 40% of its capital to retain his employment in that company if he becomes a member of Majlis Al-Shura.

The Supreme Court held that a foreign court judgment from a country with whom Oman has a bilateral agreement for the recognition and enforcement of court judgment must not be enforced if the Omani enforcement court fails to examine the original foreign judgment and verify that it meets the legal formalities before making its order to enforce it.

The Supreme Court held that the criminal misconduct by employees of a policyholder are considered equivalent to third party conduct, and therefore qualify as a basis for making insurance claims by the employer.

In a copyright infringement dispute, the Supreme Court set aside a judgment awarding compensation for copyright infringement due to the failure of the trial court to base the compensation amount on a quantification methodology that takes into account the damage suffered as a result of the copyright infringement.

The Supreme Court held that signing a new contract with an employee transferred under article 48bis of the Labour Law of 2003 is invalid if the contract provides less favourable treatment than that enjoyed by the employee with their previous employer.