Bahraini man’s 4 wives, 21 children demand return of two cars inherited by Asian wife before his death

TDT | Manama

The Daily Tribune – www.newsofbahrain.com

The Court of Urgent Matters found that it lacked jurisdiction to hear a case filed by a Bahraini man’s four wives and 21 children against his Asian wife from a fixed-term marriage, demanding the return of two cars registered in her name as a gift before his death.

Attorney Siddiqa Al Mawali, representing the Asian wife, said that her client had worked in one of the late man’s businesses for over 20 years, and that they had married under a one-year temporary marriage contract, but their relationship lasted 15 years until his death. Because the wife of a fixedterm marriage does not inherit, the businessman bought her two cars as a gift for her service and loyalty during the 15 years she worked for him. When his children (six sons, 17 daughters) and wives inherited his wealth, they were displeased and sought to reclaim the cars.

They filed a lawsuit before the Court of Urgent Matters as heirs of the late businessman, who died in April 2022, indicating that he suffered from multiple diseases that affected his memory and ability to conduct life affairs, which they claimed the defendant took advantage of to register the two cars in her name.

The court imposed a precautionary seizure of the two cars and authorised them to submit an expert report proving their case. On the merits of the ruling, the court noted that the validity of the legator’s actions is a matter of objective investigation, especially since he did not suffer from any diseases affecting sound behaviour that prevented him from concluding legal actions.

Furthermore, the court noted the text of Article 8 of the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law, and Article 176 of the same law. The given documents were not sufficient to favour the point of view of one party over the other, especially regarding the invalidity of the legator’s transfer of ownership of two cars to the defendant. “The case requires investigation, which is outside the jurisdiction of the Court of Urgent Matters, thereby ruling that it has no jurisdiction to hear the case and obligating the plaintiffs to pay the expenses and attorney fees,” the Court’s verdict stated.