Employee Awarded BHD 7,524 Despite Signing an End-of-Service Settlement
A Bahrain employment case examines the scope of an end-of-service settlement and claims for dismissal compensation and outstanding notice pay.
AHMED MAHMOUD SAYED HASSAN ELSOFANY — 03/11/2026
According to the supplied case summary, Bahrain's Court of Cassation ordered a company operating in aviation services to pay a former employee BHD 7,524 for termination without a lawful justification and the outstanding portion of his notice entitlement. The ruling partially overturned an earlier judgment that had rejected these claims on the basis of a settlement signed when his employment ended.
The Employment Relationship and the Claim
The employee joined the company in February 2025 under a two-year fixed-term contract, with total monthly pay of approximately BHD 500, including shift and transport allowances. In June of the same year, the company notified him that his employment was ending. On that day, he signed an acknowledgment that he had received his financial entitlements.
Believing that his rights had not been paid in full, he brought an employment claim seeking one month's unpaid wages, compensation for unlawful dismissal, notice pay, annual-leave pay and an end-of-service certificate. The first-instance court ordered the company to provide the certificate but rejected the remaining claims, treating the settlement as a discharge of all the company's obligations towards him.
The Challenge Before the Court of Cassation
The employee challenged the judgment, arguing that the settlement was invalid because he had signed it under pressure. He also relied on an express reservation written on the document before signing and a discrepancy between its stated date and the date it was actually prepared.
The Court of Cassation identified a contradiction in the company's position. Before the labour case-management judge, the company had argued that no dismissal compensation was due because the employment ended during probation owing to poor performance. That position was inconsistent with treating the settlement as proof that the same compensation had already been paid.
Probation and the Reason for Termination
The case summary records that the court found the employee's approximately four months of service exceeded the probation period applicable in this case. It also found that the company had not established a lawful reason for termination or followed the procedures required to establish poor performance before dismissing him.
The Scope of the Settlement
The court concluded that the settlement remained valid and effective, but only in respect of sums shown to have actually been received: wages, annual-leave pay and part of the notice entitlement. Its effect did not extend to dismissal compensation and the unpaid balance of notice pay where payment had not been established. The court therefore partially overturned the judgment and ordered the company to pay BHD 7,524.