Latest articles
MASHREQ AL ISLAMI FINANCE COMPANY v BABAR REHMAN [2019] DIFC CFI 016 — Denial of adjournment application (07 March 2019)
The dispute centered on an application filed by the Defendant, Mr. Babar Rehman, on 6 March 2019, seeking to adjourn a hearing that had been previously listed for 12 March 2019 in the ongoing litigation between himself and the Claimant, Mashreq Al Islami Finance Company PJSC.
MASHREQ AL ISLAMI FINANCE COMPANY v BABAR REHMAN [2018] DIFC CFI 016 — Compelling document production via Redfern Schedule (25 October 2018)
The dispute arises from ongoing litigation between Mashreq Al Islami Finance Company PJSC (formerly Al Badr Islamic Finance Company PJSC) and the defendant, Babar Rehman. The claimant initiated a formal process to compel the disclosure of specific evidence necessary for the adjudication of the…
MASHREQ AL ISLAMI FINANCE COMPANY v BABAR REHMAN [2018] DIFC CFI 016 — Case management directions for trial (19 September 2018)
This order establishes the procedural roadmap for the resolution of the dispute between Mashreq Al Islami Finance Company and Babar Rehman, mandating strict adherence to document production and trial preparation timelines.
MASHREQ AL ISLAMI FINANCE COMPANY v BABAR REHMAN [2018] DIFC CFI 016 — Setting aside default judgment in Ijara disputes (15 April 2018)
The lawsuit centered on the termination of an *Ijara Mosufa* Agreement concerning a property located at 1513 Liberty House, DIFC, Dubai. Mashreq Al Islami Finance Company (the Claimant) sought a declaration that the agreement had been terminated as of 25 September 2016, effectively stripping Babar…
MASHREQ AL ISLAMI FINANCE COMPANY v BABAR REHMAN [2018] DIFC CFI 016 — Setting aside default judgment (05 April 2018)
The litigation concerns a financial claim initiated by Mashreq Al Islami Finance Company PJSC (formerly Al Badr Islamic Finance Company PJSC) against the defendant, Babar Rehman. The dispute originated in a claim filed under case number CFI-016-2017, which culminated in a default judgment issued by…
RASMALA INVESTMENTS HOLDINGS v AMER SAAD FAWZI AL KHAYYAT [2016] DIFC CFI 016 — Variation of freezing injunction via consent order (10 November 2016)
The litigation between Rasmala Investments Holdings Limited and Amer Saad Fawzi Al Khayyat concerns a high-stakes commercial dispute involving the restructuring of shareholdings in Madaares PJSC.
RASMALA INVESTMENTS HOLDINGS v AMER SAAD FAWZI AL KHAYYAT [2016] DIFC CFI 016 — Consent order varying prior injunctive relief (30 October 2016)
The variation of the 16 May 2016 order was necessitated by the parties’ mutual desire to implement a comprehensive settlement strategy documented in a Framework Agreement dated 19 October 2016.
MOHAMMAD ABU ALHAJ v SHEIK SULTAN KHALIFA SULTAN AL NEHAYAN [2016] DIFC CFI 016 — Pre-trial procedural directions for trial scheduling (21 November 2016)
The litigation involves a complex series of claims brought by Mohammad Abu AlHaj and Abu AlHaj Holding against Sheik Sultan Khalifa Sultan Al Nehayan, both in his personal capacity and as a Director of Gold Holding Ltd.
MOHAMMAD ABU ALHAJ v SHEIK SULTAN KHALIFA SULTAN AL NEHAYAN [2016] DIFC CFI 016 — Procedural enforcement of document production (26 October 2016)
The dispute centers on a complex litigation involving allegations of corporate mismanagement and defamation, as previously detailed in [MOHAMMAD ABU ALHAJ v SHEIK SULTAN KHALIFA SULTAN AL NEHAYAN [2016] DIFC CFI 016 — Corporate mismanagement and defamation claims (18 February…
MOHAMMAD ABU AL HAJ v SHEIK SULTAN KHALIFA SULTAN AL NEHAYAN [2016] DIFC CFI 016 — Case management directions for complex commercial litigation (31 August 2016)
The litigation involves a complex commercial dispute initiated by the Claimants, Mohammad Abu Al Haj and Abu Al Haj Holding, against the Defendants, Sheik Sultan Khalifa Sultan Al Nehayan, both in his personal capacity and in his capacity as a Director of Gold Holding Ltd.
MOHAMMAD ABU ALHAJ v SHEIK SULTAN KHALIFA SULTAN AL NEHAYAN [2016] DIFC CFI 016 — procedural default and extension of time applications (09 March 2016)
The litigation involved a multifaceted dispute between the Claimants, Mohammad Abu AlHaj and Abu AlHaj Holding, and the Defendants, Sheik Sultan Khalifa Sultan Al Nehayan (in his capacity as Director of Gold Holding Ltd and in his personal capacity).
MOHAMMAD ABU ALHAJ v SHEIK SULTAN KHALIFA SULTAN AL NEHAYAN [2016] DIFC CFI 016 — Corporate mismanagement and defamation claims (18 February 2016)
Justice Roger Giles clarifies the application of the rule in Foss v Harbottle and the necessity for specific pleadings in defamation claims within the DIFC.
MOHAMMAD ABU ALHAJ v SHEIK SULTAN KHALIFA SULTAN AL NEHAYAN [2015] DIFC CFI 016 — Procedural strictness regarding remote attendance at Case Management Conferences (08 October 2015)
The dispute in CFI 016/2015 centered on a procedural application filed by the Claimants, Mohammad Abu AlHaj and Abu AlHaj Holding, against the Defendants, Sheik Sultan Khalifa Sultan Al Nehayan in his capacity as Director of Gold Holding Ltd and in his personal capacity.
REPUBLIC OF DJIBOUTI v ALLEN & OVERY [2014] DIFC CFI 016 — formal discontinuance of professional negligence proceedings (13 November 2014)
The litigation involved a multi-party claim initiated by the Republic of Djibouti, the Autorité des Ports et des Zones Franches de Djibouti, and the Port Autonome International de Djibouti against the global law firm Allen & Overy LLP.
THE REPUBLIC OF DJIBOUTI v ALLEN & OVERY [2014] DIFC CFI 016 — Costs liability for specific litigation windows (10 August 2014)
The litigation involved a claim brought by the Republic of Djibouti, the Autorite des Ports et des Zones Franches de Djibouti, and the Port Autonome International de Djibouti against the international law firm Allen & Overy LLP.
ROBINSON CLUB GMBH v ZABEEL INVESTMENTS [2013] DIFC CFI 016 — The primacy of the Zabeel Special Judicial Committee over DIFC arbitral enforcement (08 May 2014)
The dispute arose from a successful ICC arbitration in which Robinson Club GMBH was awarded €22,976,250 in damages against Zabeel Investments LLC for breaches of a Hotel Management Agreement and a Technical Services Agreement.
ROBINSON CLUB GMBH v ZABEEL INVESTMENT [2014] DIFC CFI 016 — Appellate permission granted on public interest grounds (06 March 2014)
Robinson Club GmbH initiated this application following the refusal of H.E. Justice Ali Al Madhani on 9 February 2014 to grant permission to appeal the substantive judgment delivered by Justice Sir David Steel. The underlying dispute between Robinson Club GmbH and Zabeel Investment L.L.C.
ROBINSON CLUB GMBH v ZABEEL INVESTMENT [2014] DIFC CFI 016 — Dismissal of appeal regarding Special Judicial Committee jurisdiction (09 February 2014)
The dispute originated from an attempt by Robinson Club GMBH to ratify and enforce an arbitral award against Zabeel Investment. Following an initial decision by Justice Sir David Steel on 25 November 2013, which effectively stayed or declined jurisdiction in light of the newly established Zabeel…
ROBINSON CLUB GMBH v ZABEEL INVESTMENTS [2013] DIFC CFI 016 — The primacy of the Zabeel Special Judicial Committee over DIFC enforcement (28 November 2013)
This judgment clarifies the jurisdictional boundaries between the DIFC Courts and the Zabeel Special Judicial Committee, confirming that Ruler’s Orders establishing specialized committees override the DIFC’s general jurisdiction over arbitral enforcement.
ROBINSON CLUB GMBH v ZABEEL INVESTMENT [2013] DIFC CFI 016 — Transfer to the Special Judicial Committee (09 June 2013)
The litigation involved a claim brought by Robinson Club GMBH against Zabeel Investment L.L.C. within the DIFC Court of First Instance. While the specific underlying commercial grievance—whether contractual, tortious, or related to property—remained secondary to the procedural question of forum,…
CAROL v CHRIS & CIRO [2012] DIFC CFI 016 — Summary dismissal of application to reopen judgment (26 November 2012)
The DIFC Court of First Instance affirms the finality of appellate decisions, ruling that a party cannot reopen a judgment based on claims of procedural unfairness if they failed to present a credible defence when given the opportunity.
CAROL v CHRIS & CIRO [2012] DIFC CFI 016 — Jurisdictional boundaries of the Small Claims Tribunal (18 September 2012)
The dispute originated as a claim brought by Carol before the Small Claims Tribunal, which resulted in an initial order dated 6 February 2012. While the underlying factual narrative of the claim is not detailed in the final order, the procedural history indicates that Carol sought recovery of a…
CAROL v CHRIS & CIRO [2012] DIFC CFI 016 — Appeal against Small Claims Tribunal order (09 September 2012)
The dispute originated from a claim filed by Carol, which was initially heard before the Small Claims Tribunal (SCT). The litigation concerned a financial claim for the recovery of funds, which ultimately resulted in a significant judgment against the first defendant, Chris.
Robert Dickenson v Enventure Middle East [2010] DIFC CFI 016 — Discontinuance by consent (04 October 2010)
The litigation initiated by Robert Dickenson against Enventure Middle East Limited and Enventure Global Technology LLC represented a formal legal challenge brought before the DIFC Court of First Instance.