Latest news with #BD101
Daily Tribune
5 days ago
- Daily Tribune
Whistleblower Sparks Food Fraud Trial
Alone warehouse employee's refusal to falsify food expiry dates has triggered one of Bahrain's largest food fraud cases in recent years, with the Third High Criminal Appeals Court set to deliver its verdict on August 20. The case began when the worker reported to the Northern Governorate Police that he had been coerced into altering expiry dates on expired food products. He provided video evidence showing the process of removing original dates and replacing them with false ones, prompting the Ministry of Industry and Commerce to swiftly shut down the warehouse and related outlets. Massive evidence haul Investigators from the Public Prosecution inspected the warehouse, questioned 29 suspects, and seized more than 14,000 expired food items along with chemicals used to erase original dates. Forensic examination confirmed the tampering, and some falsified products were found for sale in other markets. The original ruling by the first-instance court imposed prison sentences ranging from two to three years, fines exceeding BD200,000, and the closure of both companies for six months. One company owner was sentenced to three years in prison and fined BD100,000, while his brother was fined BD101,000. A company official received a three-year sentence, and 19 workers were each sentenced to two years, with all foreign defendants to be deported after serving their sentences. Food safety warning Additionally, both food distribution companies were fined BD10,000 each, and all spoiled and counterfeit products and related tools were ordered to be confiscated and destroyed. Public Prosecution officials reiterated that food safety is a top priority and warned that endangering public health constitutes a serious crime that will be met with strict legal action. The defence has appealed, seeking to overturn the convictions and acquit their clients. The final verdict will be issued on August 20.
Gulf Insider
14-03-2025
- Business
- Gulf Insider
Bahrain: Court Orders Real Estate Firm to Return BD101,000 to Investor for Failure to Deliver Property
A civil court has ruled in favor of an investor, ordering a real estate firm to return BD101,000 following a dispute over an undelivered property. The court annulled the 2023 sale contract, as well as incentive and buyback agreements, due to a lack of evidence that the company had fulfilled its obligations. The company is now required to pay the investor BD101,000, along with 2 percent annual interest from the date of the lawsuit in 2024 until the full amount is settled. It must also cover all legal costs and court fees associated with the case. Dispute The dispute originated when the investor paid BD101,000 for a property that was never delivered. The investor sought a refund and compensation for unpaid incentives, filing a lawsuit to nullify the sale agreement and related contracts after the company allegedly failed to complete the project, transfer ownership, or honor financial terms. According to the investor's lawyer, Rashid AlBinali, the legal action was taken against both the company and its owner. Sale agreement The lawsuit demanded the annulment of the original sale agreement and all subsequent arrangements tied to the promised incentives, along with the full return of the BD101,000 payment, including interest for the delay. The case arose from a preliminary sale contract signed in 2023, in which the investor agreed to purchase a property unit for BD101,000, paid in two installments. On the same day, an incentive agreement was signed, promising BD13,130 in bonuses, split into two equal payments over a 12-month period, ending in April 2024. The agreement was later extended for another year, with the investor receiving quarterly payments totaling BD12,120. Buyback agreement. Additionally, a buyback agreement was signed, guaranteeing that the company would repurchase the unit for the original price. However, the company failed to meet its obligations. The project was left unfinished, ownership was never transferred, and no incentive payments were made during the extended period. With no resolution in sight, the investor turned to the courts to annul both agreements and recover the invested funds.
Daily Tribune
14-03-2025
- Business
- Daily Tribune
Court orders real estate firm to return BD101,000 to investor for failure to deliver property
A civil court has ruled in favor of an investor, ordering a real estate firm to return BD101,000 following a dispute over an undelivered property. The court annulled the 2023 sale contract, as well as incentive and buyback agreements, due to a lack of evidence that the company had fulfilled its obligations. The company is now required to pay the investor BD101,000, along with 2 percent annual interest from the date of the lawsuit in 2024 until the full amount is settled. It must also cover all legal costs and court fees associated with the case. Dispute The dispute originated when the investor paid BD101,000 for a property that was never delivered. The investor sought a refund and compensation for unpaid incentives, filing a lawsuit to nullify the sale agreement and related contracts after the company allegedly failed to complete the project, transfer ownership, or honor financial terms. According to the investor's lawyer, Rashid AlBinali, the legal action was taken against both the company and its owner. Sale agreement The lawsuit demanded the annulment of the original sale agreement and all subsequent arrangements tied to the promised incentives, along with the full return of the BD101,000 payment, including interest for the delay. The case arose from a preliminary sale contract signed in 2023, in which the investor agreed to purchase a property unit for BD101,000, paid in two installments. On the same day, an incentive agreement was signed, promising BD13,130 in bonuses, split into two equal payments over a 12-month period, ending in April 2024. The agreement was later extended for another year, with the investor receiving quarterly payments totaling BD12,120. Buyback agreement. Additionally, a buyback agreement was signed, guaranteeing that the company would repurchase the unit for the original price. However, the company failed to meet its obligations. The project was left unfinished, ownership was never transferred, and no incentive payments were made during the extended period. With no resolution in sight, the investor turned to the courts to annul both agreements and recover the invested funds.
