Dr. Rashid, Mohamed El Murtada and Co.

Barristers and Legal Consultants Date: 25/2/2014 Our Ref: Labor/38/2013 Before Appeal Court Labor Panel Muscat Sultanate of Oman Appeal 78 and 83 / 2014

Filed by: Mohammed Sarbadani Appellant Represented by: Dr. Rashid and Mohamed Murtada Law Office Versus: Radec Construction Company Represented by: Kamilia Al-Busaidi Law Office

Respondent

Subject: Reply to Appeal 83/2014 With due respect and appreciation and on behalf of our client, the appellee, we lodge this reply to the appeal submission: 1- The appellant disputes the judgment in favor of our client regarding the after-service gratuity under the pretext that he breached the contract when he resigned without prior notice. However, this defense does not affect the judgment and does not have any legal grounds because the contract can terminate for many reasons contained in Article (43) of the Labor Law. These reasons include resignation. As for the non-compliance with the notice condition, the penalty would be to obligate the violating party to pay the amount of the notice period (Article 37) and not to deprive the worker of any rights stipulated in the employment contract or the Law. 1-1 In our replies in the previous submissions that Mr. Omar Al-Rajhi, owner of the company, asked our client to resign and our client did that. This means that the resignation was according to prior arrangement with the owner of the appellant company. The appellant did not ask him to remain at work until the end of the notice period and this indicates that it waived this right as per Article (38) of the Labor Law. It cannot attribute any violation regarding the resignation to our client. The judgment was mistaken in obligating our client to pay the amount of the notice period as we clarified in the original appeal 78/2014 filed by our client versus the judgment. 2- The defense of the appellant has various discrepant. It talks about the resignation and demands the amount for the notice period while at the same time it mentions Article 40/9

of the Labor Law to deny the respondent of all its rights despite that it did not take the decision to dismiss the respondent under this Article because dismissal should not be deducted but should rather be according to a written justifiable decision so that the courts can verify the validity and integrity of the dismissal decision. As the contract is unlimited, an explicit reason for dismissal should be mentioned in the related decision. 2-1 The defense of the appellant that depends on the commercial lawsuit is not productive because that lawsuit was dismissed and the reasons therein are different from those in this lawsuit that relates to labor rights due to the respondent. Moreover, the losses claimed by the plaintiff were not claimed as per the procedures stipulated in Article 40/2 read with Article 30 of the Labor Law, i.e. the need to inform the concerned bodies of these losses within three days from the discovery of the incident, if any. As the appellant did not follow that, its defense becomes unproductive and should be dismissed by the court.

Our client requests the following: 1- Dismissal of the appeal 83/2014 and obligate the appellant to pay litigation charges and expenses. 2- In appeal 78/2014, judge in favor of our client regarding his requests in the appeal declaration. Kindest Regards Lawyer/ Adam Muhammad Ahmad Al-Nour Dr. Rashid and Muhammad El-Murtada Law Office

General Power of Attorney I, the undersigned, Muhammad Sarbadani, a British national, holder of passport (761272457) and ID (784-1954-8530858-9) hereby grant lawyers Muhammad El-Murtada Hamed (RN: AA/8/A/2002), Dr. Rashid bin Hamad bin Humaid Al-Balushi (37/F/2006), Adam Muhammad Ahmad Al-Nour (RN: AA/107/A/2006), Tamadher Hamed Abdullah Ahmad (RN: AA/49/A/2004), Jamad bin Saif bin Khamis Al-Amry (RN: 237/B/2007), and Nasser bin Khadem bin Khamis Al-Rashdi (RN: 1849/TM/2012) who work at Dr. Rashid and Muhammad El-Murtada Law Office, a general power of attorney to represent me jointly and severally in all the lawsuits filed by or against me whether at ROP, public prosecution, primary and appeal courts, the Supreme Court, any concerned department or governmental units, and arbitration panels. They shall have the right to plead on my behalf, sign submissions, pay judicial expenses, acknowledge, conclude settlements, write off the lawsuits, deposit and withdraw documents, challenge their forgery, deny handwritings and signatures and seals, ask for oath, provide evidence and witnesses and cross examine them, and request appointment of experts and discuss/deny them. They shall receive and implement judgments and receive executive forms of the judgments and follow up their implementation. In short, they are authorized to take any measures they deem appropriate in these lawsuits and measures and delegate any of the functions entrusted to then to others in Oman.

----------------------------Name and signature of client

Witnesses: 1) Nasser Abdul-Aziz Nasser 2) Rafeeq Naduvilakandi Emirate of Abu Dhabi Judicial Department

Authorization Report 1203006929 On Monday 25/6/2012 Muhammad Sarbadani and others attended before me, Saif Bani Rashid, notary public. After fulfilling the measures and payment of the charges of DH 59 under receipt 831204006935, I authorized this.