Latest articles
SIMMONS AND SIMMONS MIDDLE EAST v MOHAMMAD ABDEL-KHALEQ MOHAMMED ABU-ALHAJ [2013] DIFC CFI 023 — Settlement of legal fee dispute (12 May 2013)
A Registrar-issued consent order formalizing the resolution of a professional services fee dispute through a structured settlement agreement.
SIMMONS AND SIMMONS MIDDLE EAST v MOHAMMED ABDEL-KHALEQ [2013] DIFC CFI 023 — Transfer to Small Claims Tribunal (21 March 2013)
The dispute involves a professional services claim brought by the international law firm Simmons and Simmons Middle East against Mohammed Abdel-Khaleq. While the specific nature of the underlying debt or contractual breach is not detailed in the procedural order, the filing of the claim in the…
SIMMONS AND SIMMONS MIDDLE EAST v MOHAMMAD ABDEL-KHALEQ MOHAMMAD ABU-ALHAJ [2013] DIFC CFI 023 — Procedural enforcement of Defence filings (22 January 2013)
The dispute centers on a claim initiated by the law firm Simmons and Simmons Middle East LLP against the First Defendant, Mohammad Abdel-Khaleq Mohammad Abu-Alhaj, and the Second Defendant, Petra Invest Ltd.
SIMMONS AND SIMMONS MIDDLE EAST v MOHAMMAD ABDEL-KHALEQ MOHAMMAD ABU-ALHAJ [2012] DIFC CFI 023 — Joinder of parties and procedural leave (31 October 2012)
The dispute originated from a claim filed by the international law firm Simmons and Simmons Middle East against Mohammad Abdel-Khaleq Mohammad Abu-Alhaj. While the underlying substantive merits of the claim were not detailed in this specific procedural order, the litigation reached a juncture where…
SIMMONS AND SIMMONS MIDDLE EAST v MOHAMMAD ABDEL-KHALEQ MOHAMMAD ABU-ALHAJ [2012] DIFC CFI 023 — Procedural joinder of third parties (02 September 2012)
The litigation involves a professional services dispute between the Claimant, Simmons and Simmons Middle East LLP, and the Defendant, Mohammad Abdel-Khaleq Mohammad Abu-Alhaj. The matter reached a procedural juncture on 28 August 2012, when the Claimant sought judicial intervention to expand the…
KHURAM HUSSAIN v HUSSAIN SALEH-FARID AL-AWLAQI [2011] DIFC CFI 023 — Procedural costs and assessment hearing scheduling (27 January 2011)
The litigation between Khuram Hussain and the named defendants, Hussain Saleh-Farid Al-Awlaqi, Andrew Tamplin Clout, and Ziad Naim Baya'a, reached a juncture in early 2011 where the recovery of legal costs became the primary point of contention.
KHURAM HUSSAIN v HUSSAIN SALEH-FARID AL-AWLAQI [2010] DIFC CFI 023 — Interim payment order for costs (30 December 2010)
The dispute in CFI 023/2009 involved a procedural application, identified as Application 78/2010, brought by the First and Second Defendants, Hussain Saleh-Farid Al-Awlaqi and Andrew Tamplin Clout, against the Claimant, Khuram Hussain.
TABARAK PARTNERS LLP [2010] DIFC CFI 023 — Liquidator authority to compromise claims (08 December 2010)
The dispute centered on the winding up of Tabarak Partners LLP, an entity placed into liquidation, requiring the resolution of complex claims involving multiple stakeholders. The liquidator, Shahab Haider of Sajjad Haider Chartered Accountants LLP, identified a need to resolve outstanding legal…
HUSSAIN SALEH-FARID AL-AWLAQI v TABARAK PARTNERS [2010] DIFC CFI 023 — Winding up on just and equitable grounds (27 May 2010)
The dispute centered on the internal collapse of Tabarak Partners LLP, a financial services entity registered in the DIFC. The petitioners, Hussain Saleh-Farid Al-Awlaqi and Andrew Tamplin Clout, sought the intervention of the Court of First Instance to dissolve the partnership, citing…
KHURAM HUSSAIN v HUSSAIN SALEH FARID AL-AWLAQI [2010] DIFC CFI 023 — Provisional liquidator expenditure authorization (03 May 2010)
The dispute in CFI 023/2009 centers on the administrative management of Tabarrak Partners LLP, which is currently subject to insolvency proceedings. The Provisional Liquidator, Shahab Haider, sought the Court’s permission to obtain necessary legal advice to navigate the complexities of the…
KHURAM HUSSAIN v HUSSAIN SALEH FARID AL-AWLAQI [2010] DIFC CFI 023 — Provisional liquidation and membership status (24 January 2010)
The litigation arose from a contentious internal dispute within Tabarak Partners LLP, where the claimant, Khuram Hussain, sought to challenge his purported removal from the partnership.
KHURAM HUSSAIN v HUSSAIN SALEH FARID AL-AWLAQI [2009] DIFC CFI 023 — Procedural management of further information requests (30 December 2009)
The dispute in CFI 023/2009 centers on the adequacy of the information provided by the Claimant, Khuram Hussain, in his initial pleadings. The First and Second Defendants, Hussain Saleh Farid Al-Awlaqi and Andrew Tamplin Clout, found the initial claim lacking in the necessary detail required to…
TAYSEER ALI v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2026] DIFC CFI 022 — Assessment of costs following dismissed appeal (17 March 2026)
The dispute arose following the dismissal of the Defendant’s Renewed Application for permission to appeal an earlier order made by Justice Roger Stewart. Following the dismissal of this application by H.E.
TAYSEER ALI v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2026] DIFC CFI 022 — Renewed application for permission to appeal regarding jurisdiction dismissed (29 January 2026)
The DIFC Court of Appeal confirms that specific jurisdiction clauses in incentive agreements prevail over general employment contracts, rejecting an attempt to move a share-based dispute to Pakistani courts.
TAYSEER ALI v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2025] DIFC CFI 022 — Assessment of costs in linked litigation (16 December 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance provides a critical reminder on the limits of cost recovery in multi-action litigation, emphasizing that proportionality under RDC 38 remains the primary filter for legal fees.
TAYSEER ALI v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2025] DIFC CFI 022 — Refusal of permission to appeal on share valuation dispute (20 November 2025)
The litigation concerns a contractual dispute over the valuation of shares granted to the Claimant, Tayseer Ali, by the Defendant, Sadapay Technologies. The core of the disagreement lies in the Claimant’s assertion that the Administrator failed to correctly determine the fair market value of these…
TAYSEER ALI v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2025] DIFC CFI 022 — Contractual characterization of share incentive claims (18 September 2025)
The lawsuit centered on a claim for breach of contract brought by Tayseer Ali against Sadapay Technologies Ltd. The Claimant alleged that the Defendant had improperly determined the fair market value of stock options granted to him under a Grant Agreement and a Share Incentive Plan.
IDBI BANK v FIBER PLUS [2023] DIFC CFI 022 — Default judgment for USD 9.5 million following failed service via courier (10 July 2023)
The lawsuit concerns a substantial financial recovery claim initiated by IDBI Bank Limited against a group of six respondents: Fiber Plus LLC, Mr. Kapil Chugh, Mr. Vishal Goel, Shilpi Worldwide DMCC, Ram Jharoke Leasing & Finance Limited, and Dios Hospitality (P) Ltd.
CHORTEN WANGYEL v DODECA HOLDING [2022] DIFC CFI 022 — Registrar order of discontinuance (04 August 2022)
The litigation initiated by Chorten Wangyel against Dodeca Holding Limited under case number CFI 022/2022 represents a procedural termination of a dispute that did not reach a substantive hearing.
CHORTEN WANGYEL v DODECA HOLDING [2022] DIFC CFI 022 — Consent order for discontinuance (02 August 2022)
The litigation initiated by Chorten Wangyel against Dodeca Holding Limited originated from a claim filed on 21 March 2022. While the specific underlying commercial or contractual grievances were not detailed in the public record, the filing of a Claim Form in the Court of First Instance indicates a…
IDBI BANK v AMIRA C FOODS INTERNATIONAL [2021] DIFC CFI 022 — Determining contractual compound interest liability (16 May 2021)
The dispute arose from the parties' inability to reach a consensus on the precise quantum of interest owed following the Court’s initial judgment, which awarded the Claimant a principal sum of USD 6,421,224.71.
IDBI BANK v AMIRA C FOODS INTERNATIONAL DMCC [2021] DIFC CFI 022 — Permission to appeal granted (10 March 2021)
The dispute arises from the underlying litigation between IDBI Bank Limited and the Defendants, Amira C Foods International DMCC and Mr. Karan A Chanana. Following a judgment issued on 30 November 2020, the Defendants sought to challenge the court's findings by filing an application for permission…
IDBI BANK v AMIRA C FOODS INTERNATIONAL DMCC [2021] DIFC CFI 022 — Permission to appeal granted (07 March 2021)
The litigation arises from a dispute between IDBI Bank Limited (the Claimant) and the Defendants, Amira C Foods International DMCC and Mr Karan A Chanana. Following a judgment issued on 30 November 2020, the Defendants sought to challenge the Court's findings by filing an application for permission…
IDBI BANK v AMIRA C FOODS INTERNATIONAL DMCC [2020] DIFC CFI 022 — Abuse of process and the rule in Henderson v Henderson (30 November 2020)
The dispute centered on the recovery of USD 6,421,224.71, which IDBI Bank (the "Bank") alleged was owed by Amira C Foods International DMCC ("Amira") under a Facilities Agreement dated 11 August 2014. The claim also sought to hold the second defendant, Mr.