KUWAIT CITY, Jan 3: The Criminal Court acquitted a member of a gang, identified as ‘Rambo’, of stealing mobile phones. Case files indicate the gang steals mobile phones from shops by using white weapons and forcing sellers to give them the items.
One of the gang members was arrested when he used a stolen prepaid card. He then provided police with information on the other gang members. The defendants’ lawyer, Attorney Jarrah Al-Shureika, demanded for the acquittal of his client due to the absence of incriminating evidence. Meanwhile, the Personal Status Court, presided over by Judge Faisal Al-Yaseen, granted custody of the children to a woman whose identity was not revealed.
The court also instructed the woman’s husband to give her KD 2,750 monthly for their three children’s expenses, starting from Jan 26. This is in addition to KD 1,500 for furniture and KD750 for hiring a housemaid whose salary will be KD 80. The woman’s lawyer, Attorney Dr Hana Bu Jarwa, said her client married the defendant in 1996 and they have three children. She disclosed the defendant refused to pay for the marital expenses although he is capable of doing so. The lawyer presented all the necessary documents including the salary slip of the defendant and the couple’s marriage contract to support her argument.
Air ambulance tackled 1,087 cases in holidays: Director of Medical Emergency Department Dr Tariq Al-Jassar said the victims of accidents and other emergency situations in the northern and southern parts of the country during the New Year holiday were transported to hospitals through the air ambulance.
In a press statement, the Operations Section in the Medical Emergency Department disclosed they dealt with 1,087 cases during the holiday – 753 were referred to hospitals and 334 were provided treatment on the spot.
The department said the cases included traffic accidents, fistfights and minor injuries. It went on to say that 101 traffic accidents were registered during the holiday – 38 on Thursday, 30 on Friday, 30 on Saturday and three as at 12:00 noon on Sunday. According to the department, the Operations Unit handled 639 cases during the same period as follows – 190 on Thursday, 148 on Friday, 184 on Saturday and 117 on Sunday; while it registered seven public brawls and six burn cases.
‘Bank must pay back’: The Administration Court ordered one of the local banks to pay a sum of KD 26,000 to a citizen, which is the sum acquired by the bank illegally from the plaintiff. The case files indicate that, through lawyer Muhammad Al-Majdi, the plaintiff accused the bank of deducting from him sums of money illegally, after the bank changed the interest rate of which the plaintiff was to pay back the loan he took from the bank.
The lawyer indicated that, his client took a loan of KD 70,000 together with his wife, for them to pay at an installment of KD 216 per month in a period of 18 months. The lawyer pointed out that, his client was surprised to find out that the bank had deducted all his salary, which is illegal and in violation of the loan contract signed by the two parties, in addition, without prior warning, the bank increased the monthly installment rate, which is also in violation of the contract and of the law.
Row over chalet: The Court of Appeals nullified the administrative decision issued by Kuwait Municipality and the Committee for Protecting State Properties regarding the demolition of a chalet which interlocked with an adjacent chalet due to alleged violations committed by its owner.
The court ordered the Municipality to pay an undisclosed sum and the plaintiff’s counsel, Attorney Osama Al-Sanad, filed the lawsuit on behalf of his client to ensure that the Municipality and the committee suspend the demolition. He said the Municipality has been sending warning letters to chalet owners for demolition and the last of such warnings were issued last week. On the other hand, the Court of First Instance pointed out that authorities have yet to issue any decision in that regard, as they only sent warnings.
It affirmed that the officials neither carried out any demolition nor revoked the ownership license, and the decision was unacceptable. The lower court’s failure to issue a clear verdict to stop the demolition prompted the plaintiff to appeal the verdict because he felt his right was not protected.
By Jaber Al-Hamoud Al-Seyassah Staff