Latest articles
Laurance LLC v Lazarus [2022] DIFC SCT 393 — failure to substantiate project management services (26 December 2022)
The dispute centered on a breach of contract claim initiated by Laurance LLC, a Dubai-based consultancy, against an individual client, Lazarus. The Claimant sought remuneration for project management services allegedly rendered during March and April 2022 in relation to the renovation of the…
MAKISA MANAGEMENT v MAKAN [2020] DIFC SCT 393 — Enforceability of notice periods in consultancy agreements (21 December 2020)
This Small Claims Tribunal judgment clarifies the high evidentiary threshold required for a defendant to justify the immediate termination of a consultancy agreement based on allegations of incompetence or gross negligence.
MURBAKI v MITHILA [2023] DIFC SCT 392 — Enforceability of opt-in jurisdiction clauses in small claims (14 December 2023)
The dispute arose from a contractual disagreement regarding the provision of services related to Mobile Elevated Work Platforms. Murbaki, an Abu Dhabi-based company, initiated proceedings against Mithila, a Dubai-registered entity, to recover outstanding payments.
Numair v Naufil [2024] DIFC SCT 391 — Termination of lease and refund of overpaid rent (20 November 2024)
The Small Claims Tribunal clarifies the enforceability of fixed-term lease expiry dates within the DIFC, mandating the vacation of premises and the restitution of overpaid rent.
Niyaniya v Nubal [2023] DIFC SCT 390 — Enforcement of discretionary settlement payments following DFSA investigation (22 December 2023)
The dispute centered on the interpretation of a Settlement Agreement dated 2 June 2022, which followed the termination of the Claimant’s employment as Head of Compliance. The Claimant sought to recover an "Additional Settlement Amount" and legal representation fees, alleging that the Defendant had…
MUSHIN v MUBAR [2023] DIFC SCT 388 — Dismissal of employment claim against an individual director (28 November 2023)
The Small Claims Tribunal clarifies the limits of personal liability for corporate officers in employment disputes, emphasizing the necessity of naming the correct legal entity as the respondent.
MURUK v MISLI [2022] DIFC SCT 388 — Setting aside a Consent Order due to procedural confusion (30 May 2023)
The litigation concerns a financial dispute arising from an alleged loan agreement. The Claimant, an individual based in Dubai, initiated proceedings against the Defendant, a Dubai-based company, seeking recovery of funds purportedly owed under a contract executed in late 2022.
JASMINE v JABEZ [2019] DIFC SCT 388 — Jurisdictional dismissal for lack of nexus (27 January 2019)
The dispute originated from a 2015 business arrangement involving the establishment of a limited liability company. Following financial difficulties, the Defendant entered into an agreement to buy out the Claimant’s shares using a combination of cash and post-dated cheques.
OLGA v ORSOLA [2025] DIFC SCT 387 — Refusal of permission to appeal in loan agreement dispute (21 October 2025)
The litigation centers on a loan agreement dated 8 April 2023, under which the Claimant, Mr. Olga, sought the recovery of AED 284,337.80. The core of the dispute involved the Defendant’s denial of the agreement’s execution, specifically alleging that his digital signature had been fraudulently…
JABRIEL EQUIPMENT RENTAL v JARITA CONTRACTING [2019] DIFC SCT 387 — Enforcement of construction machinery hire agreements (17 February 2019)
The dispute centered on a series of 27 unpaid invoices issued by the Claimant, Jabriel Equipment Rental, to the Defendant, Jarita Contracting, for the provision of construction machinery.
NAIMA v NARCISO [2023] DIFC SCT 385 — Appeal against SCT billing dispute judgment (12 January 2024)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the narrow scope of appellate review for Small Claims Tribunal decisions, emphasizing that factual findings regarding legal fees are not subject to re-litigation.
MISKOFI v MILBART [2023] DIFC SCT 385 — Dispute over legal fee transparency and contractual obligations (06 December 2023)
The Small Claims Tribunal clarifies the limitations of challenging legal invoices post-engagement, affirming that clients cannot unilaterally demand fee reductions absent a timely and substantiated objection.
Lihart v Lufant [2022] DIFC SCT 384 — Abuse of the absconding complaint process (08 December 2022)
The dispute arose following the resignation of the Claimant, Lihart, from his position as a Senior Strategy Planning Executive at Lufant. Upon the conclusion of his notice period, Lihart discovered that his former employer had initiated an absconding complaint against him, resulting in a travel…
MERUT v MUSORT [2023] DIFC SCT 383 — Employment entitlements and garden leave enforceability (05 December 2023)
The dispute arose following the Claimant’s resignation from her position at Musort, a DIFC-registered entity, on 2 October 2023. Upon resignation, the Defendant placed the Claimant on garden leave for the duration of her notice period, effectively barring her from generating the commission-based…
Luftin v Lahire [2022] SCT 383 — Employment termination and final settlement disputes (20 December 2022)
The dispute originated from the termination of the Claimant, a chef, who alleged that his employer, Lahire, failed to provide his full final settlement following his dismissal on 14 October 2022.
MOLLYCONSULTANCYLLC v MEGAN LLC [2020] DIFC SCT 382 — Jurisdiction established via accepted terms and conditions (12 January 2021)
The Small Claims Tribunal affirms that a digital acceptance of terms and conditions by an employee constitutes a valid agreement to DIFC jurisdiction, even where both parties are registered outside the DIFC.
NAVEEN v NEDHA [2023] DIFC SCT 381 — Contractual supremacy of written agreements over prior negotiations (15 January 2024)
The dispute centered on a commercial disagreement over unpaid invoices for the supply of seafood and caviar products. The Claimant, Naveen, sought recovery of AED 183,377.66, asserting that the Defendant, Nedha, had received the goods and signed the corresponding invoices but failed to remit…
MICHAEL v MATIDDA [2020] DIFC SCT 381 — Employer rights to mandate vacation leave during notice periods (12 January 2021)
This judgment clarifies the scope of employer authority under the DIFC Employment Law to unilaterally direct employees to exhaust accrued vacation leave during their notice period, reinforcing the primacy of statutory provisions over internal HR policies.
MIKHRU v MIMBA [2023] DIFC SCT 380 — Allocation of utility and registration costs in DIFC lease disputes (12 December 2023)
The Small Claims Tribunal clarifies the statutory obligations of landlords regarding lease registration and utility capacity charges, distinguishing between recurring service costs and tenant-requested administrative fees.
Maci v Magnus Limited [2020] DIFC SCT 380 — Employer liability for visa costs and salary arrears (17 January 2021)
The dispute centered on the Claimant’s demand for unpaid salary and the reimbursement of visa-related expenses following his termination during a probationary period. The Claimant, hired from Canada as a Business Development Manager, sought a total of AED 24,848.35.
LEHANI v LUFIT [2022] DIFC SCT 379 — Internship salary dispute and the limits of DIFC Employment Law (23 November 2022)
The dispute centered on an unpaid internship agreement between the Claimant, Lehani, and the Defendant, Lufit. The Claimant alleged that he had completed an internship period from 12 May 2022 to 26 August 2022, serving as a Business Development Representative.
MR JIMB v MR JUMAN and JIMBAN [2019] DIFC SCT 378 — Tenancy dispute over rent reduction and utility arrears (07 March 2019)
The dispute centered on the recovery of outstanding rental payments and utility charges for a residential unit located within the DIFC. Following the initial filing in December 2018, the Claimant sought to adjust the quantum of the claim to reflect ongoing non-payment.
NAZEEM v NIAMAT [2024] DIFC SCT 377 — Tenancy dispute regarding security deposit deductions (18 October 2024)
The dispute centered on the Claimant’s request for the full return of his AED 8,500 security deposit following the conclusion of his tenancy at a unit within the DIFC. The Claimant, Nicholas James Witty Nazeem, argued that he had returned the unit in the same condition in which it was received,…
JAVAN v JASLEEN LIMITED [2019] DIFC SCT 376 — Enforcement of Article 18 penalties for delayed salary payments (28 February 2019)
The dispute originated from the Defendant’s failure to timely satisfy a prior judgment, SCT-353-2018, which had ordered the payment of AED 121,810 in terminal dues. Following the Defendant's delay in settling these amounts, the Claimant initiated this new action to recover statutory penalties under…