Court orders woman to refund BD60,000 scholarship to University of Bahrain

TDT | Manama   

The Daily Tribune – www.newsofbahrain.com

The High Appeals Court rejected an appeal filed by a Bahraini woman challenging a court order obligating her to pay back the BD60,000 she received as a scholarship for her Master’s degree in Europe from the University of Bahrain.

UoB approached the Court to retrieve the money when the woman refused to work at the university after completing her studies as an alternative to repaying the scholarship funds as per a contract signed.

The defendant claimed that a medical condition prevents her from fulfilling her contractual commitment to the University. The Court, however, rejected her claim after the University proved that the first report she submitted to prove her illness was two years after the end of the scholarship.

Furthermore, she refused to be examined by a medical commission to confirm her illness. The University filed the lawsuit before the Court of First Instance, requesting that the defendant pay BD 60 thousand.

The woman went abroad under a scholarship contract to obtain a Master’s degree in a year, which the university later extended to another year based on her request. Court files say, however, that at the end of her scholarship, the defendant refused to return to work at the university, despite repeated reminders.

The Court of First Instance ruled that the defendant must pay the claim amount and said that she should have notified the university in writing of her health condition or the impediment that prevents her return to the Kingdom for work.

The Court also observed that the defendant failed to inform the University of her illness until the contract termination, despite receiving multiple notifications.

“The defendant’s adherence to a force majeure event had come too late, and there was no material evidence of her communication with the university in clarification of attempts, as stated in her defence,” the Court of First Instance stated in its ruling. The defendant appealed the verdict claiming that the legislator did not require the party subjected to force majeure to inform the other party of what had happened in addition to the medical reports presented before the Court of First Instance, which show the extent of the illness.

The High Appeals Court declared that the pledge to serve a public facility for a specified period, with the pledger’s obligation to repay what the facility had spent on their theoretical and practical training in case of commitment breach, is an administrative contract that needs to be honoured.