Latest articles
ROBERTO'S CLUB v PAOLO ROBERTO RELLA [2013] DIFC CFI 019 — Unless order application for disclosure (03 March 2014)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the high threshold for 'unless' orders, ruling that disclosure obligations for directors must be limited to information reasonably necessary for their specific duties.
ROBERTO'S CLUB v PAOLO ROBERTO RELLA [2014] DIFC CFI 019 — Dismissal of strike-out application and summary cost assessment (05 February 2014)
The dispute in CFI 019/2013 centers on a procedural application brought by the Defendant, Paolo Roberto Rella, against the Claimants, Roberto's Club LLC and Emain Kadrie. The Defendant sought an order to strike out the Claimants' claim and defence, predicated on the assertion that the Claimants had…
ROBERTO'S CLUB v PAOLO ROBERTO RELLA [2013] DIFC CFI 019 — Procedural directions for application hearing (14 November 2013)
The lawsuit involves a commercial dispute brought by the Claimants, Roberto's Club and Emain Kadrie, against the Defendant, Paolo Roberto Rella. While the specific underlying causes of action are not detailed in this procedural order, the matter reached a critical juncture on 7 November 2013, when…
ROBERTO'S CLUB v PAOLO ROBERTO RELLA [2013] DIFC CFI 019 — Procedural rejection of interlocutory application (11 September 2013)
The litigation in CFI 019/2013 involves a commercial dispute brought by the Claimants, Roberto’s Club and Emain Kadrie, against the Defendant, Paolo Roberto Rella. While the specific underlying merits of the claim—such as whether the dispute pertains to breach of contract, intellectual property…
SHABAB HAIDER v DEWEY & LEBOEUF [2013] DIFC CFI 019 — Approval of provisional liquidator remuneration (11 June 2013)
The DIFC Court of First Instance formalizes the remuneration of the provisional liquidator for the winding-up of the Dubai branch of the international law firm Dewey & LeBoeuf.
PETER GRAY v DEWEY & LEBOEUF [2012] DIFC CFI 019 — Conditional winding-up and procedural adjournment (05 June 2012)
This order establishes a conditional framework for the insolvency of Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, utilizing a re-advertisement mechanism to streamline the transition from provisional liquidation to a final winding-up order.
PETER GRAY v DEWEY & LEBOEUF [2012] DIFC CFI 019 — Appointment of provisional liquidator (30 April 2012)
The DIFC Court of First Instance exercises its insolvency jurisdiction to secure the assets of a major international law firm through the urgent appointment of a provisional liquidator.
INJAZAT CAPITAL v DENTON WILDE SAPTE & CO [2010] DIFC CFI 019 — Professional negligence and the limits of stay for non-domestic arbitration (07 March 2012)
The lawsuit centers on a professional negligence claim initiated by Injazat Capital Limited and Injazat Technology Fund B.S.C. against their former legal counsel, Denton Wilde Sapte & Co (DWS).
INJAZAT CAPITAL v DENTON WILDE SAPTE [2010] DIFC CFI 019 — Indefinite stay of proceedings (26 August 2010)
The litigation, registered under CFI 019/2010, involved claims brought by Injazat Capital Limited and Injazat Technology Fund B.S.C. (c) against the international law firm Denton Wilde Sapte & Co.
MORGAN STANLEY & CO INTERNATIONAL PLC v MORGAN STANLEY PRIVATE WEALTH MANAGEMENT LIMITED [2009] DIFC CFI 019 — Judicial sanction of a financial business transfer (31 August 2009)
The lawsuit concerned the internal restructuring of Morgan Stanley’s operations within the Dubai International Financial Centre. Specifically, the claimants sought a court order to facilitate the "PWM Business Transfer," which involved moving the entirety of the Private Wealth Management business…
CANARA BANK v DR BAVAGUTHU RAGHURAM SHETTY [2021] DIFC CFI 018 — Default judgment for USD 24.4 million (05 August 2021)
The lawsuit concerns a substantial debt recovery claim brought by Canara Bank (DIFC Branch) against Dr Bavaguthu Raghuram Shetty. The claimant sought to recover a total sum of USD 24,406,037.41, which represents a combination of the principal amount outstanding as of January 2021 and accrued…
DELOITTE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES v ABWAB REAL ESTATE LIMITED CO [2020] DIFC CFI 018 — Finality of litigation and the high threshold for reopening appeals (26 November 2020)
The DIFC Court of First Instance reinforces the principle of finality in litigation, dismissing an attempt to reopen a final appellate decision by clarifying that RDC r. 44.154 is not a mechanism for litigants to correct strategic failures or introduce new arguments that could have been raised…
DELOITTE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES v ZMZ INVESTMENTS [2020] DIFC CFI 018 — Dismissal of Appeal Notice (25 August 2020)
The litigation between Deloitte Professional Services and ZMZ Investments involves a dispute where the Second Defendant, ZMZ Investments, sought to challenge a prior determination through the formal submission of an Appeal Notice.
DELOITTE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES v ABWAB REAL ESTATE LIMITED CO [2019] DIFC CFI 018 — Narrowing the scope of document disclosure (20 November 2019)
The dispute arises from a broader commercial claim initiated by Deloitte Professional Services (DIFC) Limited against three defendants: Abwab Real Estate Limited Co LLC, ZMZ Investments LLC, and Al Barari Development Company.
JOHN VITALO v ATLAS MARA MANAGEMENT SERVICES [2020] DIFC CFI 018 — Consent order resolving costs liabilities (12 August 2020)
The litigation between John Vitalo and Atlas Mara Management Services Limited originated as a high-stakes employment or commercial dispute that saw the Claimant, John Vitalo, face multiple adverse costs rulings.
JOHN VITALO v ATLAS MARA MANAGEMENT SERVICES [2019] DIFC CFI 018 — Stay of costs pending appeal (11 November 2019)
The dispute arises from the underlying judgment delivered by H.E. Justice Ali Al Madhani on 5 September 2019. Following the court's initial determination, the Claimant, John Vitalo, sought to challenge the findings by filing a "Permission Application" on 26 September 2019.
JOHN VITALO v ATLAS MARA MANAGEMENT SERVICES [2018] DIFC CFI 018 — Judicial intervention in document production (28 August 2018)
This Order clarifies the Court’s role in resolving discovery disputes under RDC Part 28, mandating specific document production timelines for the parties.
EMIRATES REIT v CAMBRIDGE MIDDLE EAST INTERIORS [2017] DIFC CFI 018 — Consent order staying proceedings (23 November 2017)
The litigation involved a claim brought by Emirates REIT (CEIC) Limited against Cambridge Middle East Interiors LLC. While the specific nature of the underlying commercial disagreement—typically involving construction contracts, fit-out agreements, or service delivery disputes common to the DIFC…
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK v FAL OIL COMPANY [2019] DIFC CFI 018 — Order of Discontinuance (28 July 2019)
The final resolution of the long-standing litigation between Standard Chartered Bank and FAL Oil Company Limited, concluding with a formal notice of discontinuance filed by the Claimant.
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK v FAL OIL COMPANY [2019] DIFC CFI 018 — Assessment of costs and interest liability (11 July 2019)
The dispute centers on the final assessment of costs arising from the procedural skirmishes in the enforcement proceedings initiated by Standard Chartered Bank against FAL Oil Company.
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK v FAL OIL COMPANY [2019] DIFC CFI 018 — Procedural extension for Particulars of Claim (20 June 2019)
The litigation under case number CFI-018-2016 involves a high-stakes banking dispute initiated by Standard Chartered Bank against FAL Oil Company Limited and Investment Group Private Limited.
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK v FAL OIL COMPANY [2018] DIFC CFI 018 — Denial of permission to appeal regarding alternative service and jurisdiction (30 August 2018)
The DIFC Court of First Instance affirms the validity of email-based alternative service and confirms the breadth of its jurisdiction over DIFC-based financial institutions, rejecting an attempt to challenge the court's authority.
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK v FAL OIL COMPANY [2018] DIFC CFI 018 — Dismissal of jurisdictional challenge and service set-aside application (11 June 2018)
The litigation arose from a massive banking dispute involving five separate financial facilities agreements. Standard Chartered Bank initiated the claim against Fal Oil Company Limited and Investment Group Private Limited, seeking to recover a principal sum exceeding USD 187 million.
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK v FAL OIL COMPANY [2017] DIFC CFI 018 — Default judgment for USD 65.5 million (09 July 2017)
The lawsuit involved a significant banking and finance claim brought by Standard Chartered Bank against Fal Oil Company Limited and Investment Group Private Limited. The dispute centered on the recovery of a substantial debt, which had ballooned to over USD 65 million by May 2017 due to the…