Latest articles
ANOOP KUMAR LAL v DONNA BENTON [2022] DIFC CFI 005 — Compelling disclosure of missing electronic records (17 January 2022)
The litigation arises from claims for payments allegedly due under agreements following the sale of the Defendant’s shares in DATE Holdings Ltd to GFH Group BSC. The Claimants, who served as the Chief Operating Officer and Chief Executive Officer of The Entertainer FZ LLC, seek remuneration they…
ANOOP KUMAR LAL v DONNA BENTON [2021] DIFC CFI 005 — Directions regarding document production compliance (06 December 2021)
The litigation involves a high-stakes dispute between the Claimants, Anoop Kumar Lal and Paul Patrick Hennessy, and the Defendant, Donna Benton. While the underlying merits of the case involve complex allegations—including claims related to Employee Stock Option Plans (ESOP) and breaches of…
ANOOP KUMAR LAL v DONNA BENTON [2021] DIFC CFI 005 — Reassessment of summary costs following withdrawn immediate judgment application (28 September 2021)
Justice Roger Giles clarifies the nature of a de novo reconsideration of a Registrar’s costs assessment, emphasizing the court's duty to conduct a fresh determination of reasonableness and proportionality.
ANOOP KUMAR LAL v DONNA BENTON [2021] DIFC CFI 005 — Summary assessment of costs following withdrawal of immediate judgment application (08 September 2021)
This order provides a detailed breakdown of how the DIFC Registrar applies the principle of proportionality when assessing costs in the wake of a discontinued application.
ANOOP KUMAR LAL v DONNA BENTON [2021] DIFC CFI 005 — Document production and the limits of RDC Part 28 (31 August 2021)
The litigation involves a dispute between the Claimants, Anoop Kumar Lal and Paul Patrick Hennessy, and the Defendant, Donna Benton. The parties engaged in a contentious exchange of Requests to Produce under the Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC).
ANOOP KUMAR LAL v DONNA BENTON [2021] DIFC CFI 005 — Case management directions for ESOP and breach of fiduciary duty claims (14 July 2021)
The litigation centers on a dispute between the Claimants, Anoop Kumar Lal and Paul Patrick Hennessy, and the Defendant, Donna Benton, regarding the performance of a Settlement Agreement and Final ESOP Agreement.
ANOOP KUMAR LAL v DONNA BENTON [2021] DIFC CFI 005/2021 — Consent order discontinuing immediate judgment application (18 May 2021)
The litigation involved two consolidated claims, CFI 005/2021 and CFI 006/2021, brought by Anoop Kumar Lal and Paul Patrick Hennessy against the defendant, Donna Benton. The core of the procedural conflict centered on an application filed by the Claimants on 4 March 2021, which sought an order for…
ANOOP KUMAR LAL v DONNA BENTON [2021] DIFC CFI 005 — Consolidation of related proceedings (02 May 2021)
The litigation between Anoop Kumar Lal and Donna Benton involved two separate filings initiated in the DIFC Court of First Instance under case numbers CFI 005/2021 and CFI 006/2021. The dispute, which had previously been subject to an order on 18 March 2021 directing the progression of claims…
ANOOP KUMAR LAL v DONNA BENTON [2021] DIFC CFI 005 — Procedural transition from Part 8 to Part 7 (18 March 2021)
This order clarifies the procedural threshold for utilizing the Part 8 summary procedure versus the standard Part 7 track within the DIFC Courts.
IDBI BANK v ROYAL PRINTING PRESS [2022] DIFC CFI 005 — Default judgment for USD 7.9 million (16 September 2022)
The DIFC Court of First Instance grants a substantial default judgment against six defendants, solidifying the claimant's path to recovery in a complex multi-party commercial banking dispute.
IDBI BANK v ROYAL PRINTING PRESS [2022] DIFC CFI 005 — Alternative service of process via publication and email (11 January 2022)
The litigation involves a substantial banking dispute initiated by IDBI Bank Limited against a group of corporate entities—Royal Printing Press LLC, Union Emirates Printing & Publishing-F.Z.C, and Premier Printing Press (LLC)—alongside three individual defendants: Shijin Mathew, Sheryl Mathew, and…
IDBI BANK v ROYAL PRINTING PRESS [2021] DIFC CFI 005 — extension of time for service of proceedings (06 May 2021)
The litigation involves IDBI Bank Limited as the Claimant against a complex array of six Defendants: Royal Printing Press LLC, Union Emirates Printing & Publishing- F.Z.C, Premier Printing Press (LLC), and three individual defendants, Shijin Mathew, Sheryl Mathew, and Mathew Scaria Vadhyanath.
IDBI BANK v ROYAL PRINTING PRESS [2020] DIFC CFI 005 — procedural extension and alternative service (01 June 2020)
The litigation involves a multi-party commercial dispute initiated by IDBI Bank Limited against a group of corporate entities and individual defendants, including Royal Printing Press LLC, Union Emirates Printing & Publishing- F.Z.C, Premier Printing Press (LLC), and three individual defendants:…
DREES & SOMMER GULF FZ v TOSCANA INVESTMENT & MANAGEMENT [2018] DIFC CFI 005 — Procedural enforcement following non-attendance at CMC (10 July 2018)
The lawsuit concerns a dispute between Drees & Sommer Gulf FZ and Toscana Investment & Management, the nature of which necessitated a formal Case Management Conference (CMC) to establish the trajectory of the litigation.
DREES & SOMMER GULF FZ v TOSCANA INVESTMENT & MANAGEMENT [2018] DIFC CFI 005 — Procedural denial of default judgment (13 June 2018)
This order clarifies the primacy of court-issued Case Management Conference (CMC) directions over standard RDC timelines when determining the availability of default judgment.
FORSYTH PARTNERS GLOBAL DISTRIBUTORS LIMITED v FORSYTH PARTNERS GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED [2007] DIFC CFI 005/006/007 — Judicial determination on the absence of preferential debts in DIFC insolvencies (30 January 2008)
This judgment establishes the critical precedent that, in the absence of specific DIFCA regulations, no category of debt qualifies as "preferential" under the DIFC Insolvency Law, effectively rendering all creditor claims unsecured.
MS GEORGINA MARIE EASON v BANK SARASIN-ALPEN [2025] DIFC CFI 005 — Sanctioning a liquidator’s settlement agreement (20 November 2025)
The current application arises from the long-running liquidation of Bank Sarasin-Alpen (ME) Limited (BSA), which was initiated following the landmark Khorafi family litigation. The dispute centers on the Liquidator’s attempt to resolve complex, multi-party litigation (CFI-009-2023) and a…
MR RAFED ABDEL MOHSEN BADER AL KHORAFI v BANKSARASIN-ALPEN [2024] DIFC CFI 005 — Dismissal of redundant application in long-running liquidation (02 May 2024)
The application filed by the claimants—Mr Rafed Abdel Mohsen Bader Al Khorafi, Mrs Amrah Ali Abdel Latif Al Hamad, and Mrs Alia Mohamed Sulaiman Al Rifai—on 5 April 2024 was brought before the court during the ongoing liquidation of Bank Sarasin-Alpen (ME) Limited.
MR RAFED ABDEL MOHSEN BADER AL KHORAFI v BANK SARASIN-ALPEN [2023] DIFC CFI 005 — Procedural consolidation of jurisdiction challenges (04 July 2023)
The dispute concerns the long-running litigation initiated by Mr Rafed Abdel Mohsen Bader Al Khorafi and others against Bank Sarasin-Alpen (ME) Limited, which is currently in liquidation.
MR RAFED ABDEL MOHSEN BADER AL KHORAFI v BANK SARASIN ALPEN [2023] DIFC CFI 005 — Consent order for paper-based determination of stay application (14 June 2023)
The underlying litigation, *Mr Rafed Abdel Mohsen Bader Al Khorafi v Bank Sarasin-Alpen (ME) Limited*, represents a complex, multi-year dispute arising from the collapse and subsequent liquidation of Bank Sarasin-Alpen (ME) Limited.
AL KHORAFI v BANK SARASIN-ALPEN [2020] DIFC CFI 005 — Liquidator fee fixation (22 March 2020)
The DIFC Court of First Instance confirms the final remuneration of the liquidator for Bank Sarasin-Alpen (ME) Limited, marking a definitive step in the long-running insolvency proceedings.
AL KHORAFI v BANK SARASIN-ALPEN [2018] DIFC CFI 005 — Judicial approval of liquidator remuneration (23 September 2018)
The dispute concerns the finalization of remuneration for Mr. Shahab Haider of Sajjad Haider Chartered Accountants LLP, who was appointed as the Liquidator of Bank Sarasin-Alpen (ME) Limited following the court-ordered winding up of the entity.
SHAHAB HAIDER v SARASIN ALPEN PARTNERS [2017] DIFC CFI 005 — Formalizing the winding up of a financial subsidiary (06 August 2017)
The application brought by Mr. Shahab Haider, acting in his capacity as the proposed liquidator, was necessitated by the insolvency status of Sarasin Alpen Partners Limited, a subsidiary of Bank Sarasin Alpen (ME) Limited.
RAFED ABDEL MOHSEN BADER AL KHORAFI v BANK SARASIN-ALPEN [2017] DIFC CFI 005 — Judicial approval of liquidator remuneration (12 July 2017)
The dispute concerns the finalization of administrative expenses arising from the insolvency of Bank Sarasin-Alpen (ME) Limited. Following the initial winding-up proceedings initiated by Rafed Abdel Mohsen Bader Al Khorafi and others, the court was tasked with quantifying the remuneration due to…