-
The Courtroom of First Occasion, chaired by Counselor Mishari Al-Buaijan, dominated that the accused, as firm supervisor, unlawfully withheld KD 5,336.309 from the sufferer, stopping him from submitting a grievance with the Public Prosecution.
In a ruling highlighting the affect of the brand new residency legislation, the Courtroom of First Occasion fined an organization proprietor KD 5,000 for failing to pay a employee’s dues. The choice cites Article 19 of the legislation, which prohibits employers from utilizing overseas staff for functions apart from these for which they had been recruited, permitting them to work for third events with no license, or withholding their dues, reported Al Jarida newspaper.
The Public Prosecution charged the employer on 15 July 2024 on the Prison Investigation Division in Kuwait for unlawfully refusing to pay the employee throughout his employment. Investigations confirmed the accused’s position as employer and supervisor, and the prosecution requested penalties below Articles 1/19, 7/27, and 29 of Legislation No. 114 of 2024 in regards to the Foreigners’ Residence Legislation.
The Courtroom of First Occasion, below the chairmanship of Counselor Mishari Al-Buaijan, issued a ruling acknowledged that “the incident, as established by the courtroom’s conviction and reassured conscience, is obvious from the assessment of all case papers and performed investigations. The sufferer had joined a restricted legal responsibility firm managed by the accused, who served as the corporate’s supervisor and was answerable for its administration, as confirmed by the business register issued by the Ministry of Commerce and Trade.
The accused refused to pay the sufferer’s dues for the related interval, regardless of the issuance of Attraction No. 2024/115 Labor/5 on July 15, 2024, amounting to KD 5,336.309, with out justification. This delay prevented the sufferer from submitting his grievance with the Public Prosecution on December 2, 2025.”
The courtroom clarified that the date of the offense was amended to span from December 1, 2024 to December 2, 2025, as a substitute of July 15, 2024, since Decree-Legislation No. 114 of 2024 in regards to the Foreigners’ Residence Legislation was not revealed within the Official Gazette and got here into impact on December 1, 2024. The courtroom famous that this modification doesn’t violate the defendant’s proper to protection.
“The Courtroom of Cassation has established that in prison trials, the courtroom’s conviction and confidence within the offered proof are paramount. Proof needn’t individually show each element, as prison proof is interdependent and complementary. The courtroom could depend on any aspect or indication it finds adequate, assessing witness statements and circumstances at its discretion, no matter challenges or doubts raised.”
Relating to the civil swimsuit, Article 22 of Decree-Legislation No. 78 of 2025, amending provisions of Legislation No. 17 of 1973 on courtroom charges, stipulates that courts adjudicate circumstances solely after charges are paid or a short lived exemption is granted. If charges are unpaid, the courtroom grants the plaintiff a interval to pay; failure to take action renders the swimsuit null and void. Because the plaintiff didn’t pay throughout the allotted interval, the courtroom dominated the civil swimsuit as if it had by no means been filed.
The courtroom dominated in absentia: first, fining the accused KD 5,000 for the prison cost; and second, declaring the civil swimsuit invalid and void.