Latest articles
MUSAAB TAG ELSIR ABDELSALAM v EXPRESSO TELECOM GROUP [2020] DIFC CFI 015 — Procedural flexibility in employment claims (15 March 2020)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies that technical pleading errors, such as citing draft legislation, do not warrant summary dismissal when the underlying claim remains viable.
MUSAAB TAG ELSIR ABDELSALAM v EXPRESSO TELECOM GROUP [2019] DIFC CFI 015 — Deferral of costs assessment pending immediate judgment (21 November 2019)
The litigation involves a claim brought by Musaab Tag Elsir Abdelsalam against Expresso Telecom Group. While the underlying merits of the claim are not detailed in this specific order, the procedural posture centers on a dispute regarding the recovery of legal costs following the filing of a Notice…
MUSAAB TAG ELSIR ABDELSALAM v EXPRESSO TELECOM GROUP [2019] DIFC CFI 015 — Procedural adjournment pending immediate judgment (24 July 2019)
This order addresses the procedural status of CFI 015/2019, formalizing the adjournment of the Case Management Conference (CMC) pending the determination of an outstanding application for immediate judgment.
ED&F MAN CAPITAL MARKETS MENA v SAYYED HUSSAIN [2021] DIFC CFI 015 — Final settlement and dismissal of claims (03 February 2021)
The DIFC Court of First Instance formally concluded the long-running litigation between ED&F Man Capital Markets and its former employees and competitor, RJ O’Brien, following a comprehensive settlement agreement.
ED&F MAN CAPITAL MARKETS MENA v SAYYED HUSSAIN [2018] DIFC CFI 015 — Consent order and stay of proceedings (17 December 2018)
The lawsuit, filed under case number CFI-015-2018, centered on allegations of breach of contract, misuse of confidential information, and potential solicitation of staff by former employees and a competing entity, RJ O’Brien MENA Capital Limited.
ED&F MAN CAPITAL MARKETS MENA v SAYYED HUSSAIN [2018] DIFC CFI 015 — Procedural strike-out application denied (10 December 2018)
The Claimants, ED&F Man Capital Markets Mena Limited and ED&F Man Capital Markets Limited, initiated this application on 27 November 2018, seeking the ultimate procedural sanction against the Defendants.
ED&F Man Capital Markets MENA v Sayyed Hussain [2018] DIFC CFI 015 — Interlocutory rulings on document production, anti-suit injunctions, and evidence admissibility (31 October 2018)
The dispute centers on allegations that the First Defendant, Sayyed Hussain, conspired with the Second and Third Defendants to misappropriate the Claimants' business assets, including client lists and personnel, while allegedly being induced by promises of exorbitant compensation.
ED&F MAN CAPITAL MARKETS MENA v SAYYED HUSSAIN [2018] DIFC CFI 015 — Consent order and undertakings regarding liability trial (05 April 2018)
The DIFC Court of First Instance formalizes a consent order involving restrictive undertakings and a bifurcated trial structure to address allegations of commercial misconduct.
DIVERSIFIED ACL GROUP v DIVERSIFIED DRILLING HOLDINGS [2019] DIFC CFI 015 — Consent dismissal of long-running commercial dispute (05 May 2019)
The litigation in CFI 015/2017 represented a complex commercial conflict between the Claimant, Diversified ACL Group, and the Respondent, Diversified Drilling Holdings Limited. While the final order of 5 May 2019 does not detail the underlying substantive allegations, the case history reveals a…
DIVERSIFIED ACL GROUP v DIVERSIFIED DRILLING HOLDINGS [2019] DIFC CFI 015 — Document production order (20 March 2019)
The litigation involves a commercial dispute between Diversified ACL Group (the Claimant) and Diversified Drilling Holdings Limited (the Defendant). The core of this specific procedural contest centered on the exchange of documents via Redfern Schedules, a standard mechanism in DIFC Court…
DIVERSIFIED ACL GROUP v DIVERSIFIED DRILLING HOLDINGS [2018] DIFC CFI 015 — Procedural roadmap for complex commercial litigation (30 December 2018)
The litigation involves a commercial dispute between Diversified ACL Group (the Claimant) and Diversified Drilling Holdings Limited (the Defendant). While the underlying substantive claims remain subject to ongoing proceedings, the matter has reached a critical juncture regarding the evidentiary…
DIVERSIFIED ACL GROUP v DIVERSIFIED DRILLING HOLDINGS [2018] DIFC CFI 015 — Lifting a stay and permitting amended pleadings (11 September 2018)
The litigation involves a commercial dispute between Diversified ACL Group (the Claimant) and Diversified Drilling Holdings Limited (the Defendant). The proceedings were effectively paused in late 2017 to await the outcome of a parallel employment claim, specifically *Arthur Martin Handsel v DDIE*…
DIVERSIFIED ACL GROUP v DIVERSIFIED DRILLING HOLDINGS [2017] DIFC CFI 015 — Stay of proceedings pending RAK Labour Court resolution (18 October 2017)
The dispute centers on the intersection of DIFC Court litigation and an active employment claim filed in the Ras Al Khaimah (RAK) Labour Court. Diversified ACL Group, the Claimant in the DIFC proceedings, initiated an application on 24 September 2017 to pause the DIFC litigation.
DIVERSIFIED ACL GROUP v DIVERSIFIED DRILLING HOLDINGS [2017] DIFC CFI 015 — Procedural bar to default judgment (23 August 2017)
The Claimant, Diversified ACL Group, initiated this request seeking a default judgment against the Respondent, Diversified Drilling Holdings, under the procedural framework of the Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC).
ASIF HAKIM ADIL v FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS [2016] DIFC CFI 015 — Costs assessment and interim payment order (24 July 2016)
Following a successful employment claim, the DIFC Court of First Instance addresses the quantum of costs, rejecting a percentage reduction while ordering a substantial interim payment to the Claimant.
ASIF HAKIM ADIL v FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS [2016] DIFC CFI 015 — Final judgment and statutory penalty enforcement (29 May 2016)
This order finalizes the quantum of damages in a long-standing employment dispute, confirming the application of ongoing statutory penalties under DIFC law until full satisfaction of the judgment debt.
ASIF HAKIM ADIL v FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS [2016] DIFC CFI 015 — Leave to appeal granted regarding procedural order (22 May 2016)
The underlying dispute in CFI 015/2014 concerns a protracted employment claim brought by Asif Hakim Adil against Frontline Development Partners. Following a series of interlocutory skirmishes—including disputes over disclosure, security for costs, and witness evidence deadlines—the litigation…
ASIF HAKIM ADIL v FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS [2016] DIFC CFI 015 — Leave to appeal granted regarding procedural order (19 May 2016)
The dispute between Asif Hakim Adil and Frontline Development Partners has been characterized by extensive procedural maneuvering, culminating in the order issued by Justice Roger Giles on 3 April 2016.
ASIF HAKIM ADIL v FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS [2016] DIFC CFI 015 — Employment termination and statutory penalty application (03 April 2016)
The dispute centered on the employment relationship between Mr. Asif Hakim Adil and Frontline Development Partners, where the Claimant sought substantial compensation following his departure from the firm.
ASIF HAKIM ADIL v FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS [2015] DIFC CFI 015 — Admissibility of without prejudice materials and judicial contamination (03 November 2015)
The litigation concerns an employment dispute between Asif Hakim Adil and Frontline Development Partners Limited, stemming from the termination of the Claimant’s employment on 30 June 2013.
ASIF HAKIM ADIL v FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS [2015] DIFC CFI 015 — Procedural variation of closing submission deadlines (20 July 2015)
The litigation involves a contentious employment dispute between the Claimant, Asif Hakim Adil, and the Defendant, Frontline Development Partners. This matter has been subject to multiple procedural interventions by the Court, including earlier applications regarding strike-out motions and…
ASIF HAKIM ADIL v FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS [2015] DIFC CFI 015 — Leave to appeal granted regarding procedural order (26 March 2015)
The litigation between Asif Hakim Adil and Frontline Development Partners Limited has been characterized by a series of interlocutory skirmishes regarding disclosure and employment-related claims. This specific order concerns the Defendant’s attempt to challenge a ruling made by H.E.
ASIF HAKIM ADIL v FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS [2015] DIFC CFI 015 — Procedural variation of witness evidence deadlines (19 March 2015)
The litigation between Asif Hakim Adil and Frontline Development Partners represents a protracted employment dispute that has necessitated multiple procedural interventions by the DIFC Court.
ASIF HAKIM ADIL v FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS [2015] DIFC CFI 015 — Security for costs application dismissed (25 February 2015)
The dispute centers on a claim brought by Asif Hakim Adil against Frontline Development Partners Limited. In the course of the litigation, the Defendant filed an Application Notice, CFI-015-2014/2, on 10 December 2014, requesting that the Court order the Claimant to provide security for the…