Latest articles
FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS v ASIF HAKIM ADIL [2016] DIFC CA 006 — Court of Appeal rejects security for costs application (31 October 2016)
The litigation between Frontline Development Partners Limited and Asif Hakim Adil concerns a procedural battle within the appellate framework of the DIFC Courts. While the underlying substantive claim remains distinct, this specific interlocutory dispute centered on the Respondent’s attempt to…
TVM Capital Mena v Ali Akbar Hashemi [2014] DIFC CA 006 — Appellate adjustment of trial costs (25 December 2014)
The litigation between TVM Capital Mena Limited and Ali Akbar Hashemi originated in the Court of First Instance under claim number CFI 045/2012. While the substantive merits of the underlying claim were addressed in the order of Justice Roger Giles dated 22 May 2014, the subsequent appeal focused…
TVM CAPITAL HEALTHCARE PARTNERS v ALI AKBAR HASHEMI [2015] DIFC CA 006 — Consent order for costs settlement (09 March 2015)
The litigation between TVM Capital Healthcare Partners Limited and Ali Akbar Hashemi involved a complex dispute that originated in the Court of First Instance under CFI-045-2012. Following a judgment delivered by Justice Roger Giles on 22 May 2014, the Claimant was awarded costs subject to specific…
DAMAN REAL ESTATE CAPITAL PARTNERS v AHMED ZAKI BEYDOUN [2014] DIFC CA 006 — Reopening an appeal due to judicial oversight (26 March 2014)
The dispute centered on the validity of a termination notice issued by the Respondent, Ahmed Zaki Beydoun, concerning a residential apartment in a DIFC development. The Appellant, Daman Real Estate Capital Partners, had entered into a Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) with the Respondent.
AHMED ZAKI BEYDOUN v DAMAN REAL ESTATE CAPITAL PARTNERS [2014] DIFC CA 006 — procedural management of an application to re-open an appeal (12 March 2014)
The litigation involves a real estate dispute between the Claimant, Ahmed Zaki Beydoun, and the Respondents, Daman Real Estate Capital Partners Limited and Asteco Property Management LLC.
LXT Real Estate Broker v SIR Real Estate [2026] DIFC CA 005 — Appellate intervention on security for costs (21 January 2026)
The Court of Appeal sets aside a restrictive security for costs order, ruling that the CFI erred in principle by treating litigation funding as a categorical discount and failing to properly weigh prejudice to the defendant.
LXT REAL ESTATE BROKER v SIR REAL ESTATE [2026] DIFC CA 005 — Security for costs appellate review (13 January 2026)
The litigation centers on a dispute between LXT Real Estate Broker L.L.C (the Claimant) and SIR Real Estate LLC (the Defendant), originating in the Court of First Instance (CFI-073-2024).
MARKO KRALJ v ROYAL VISION INTELLIGENT FUND [2023] DIFC CA 005 — Administrative closure of appellate proceedings (06 November 2023)
The DIFC Court of Appeal formalizes the termination of appellate proceedings following the resolution of underlying jurisdictional and substantive issues in the Court of First Instance.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v Mr ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2022] DIFC CA 005/2022 — Court of Appeal costs determination (30 November 2022)
The DIFC Court of Appeal clarifies the application of judicial discretion in cost-shifting, awarding two-thirds of appeal costs while emphasizing the relevance of party conduct in the final assessment.
MEYDAN GROUP v BANYAN TREE [2015] DIFC CA 005 — Default costs assessment following appellate litigation (26 February 2015)
The dispute before the Court of Appeal in CA 005/2014 concerned the finalization of costs following a substantive judgment delivered on 3 November 2014. After the conclusion of the appellate proceedings, Banyan Tree Corporate PTE Ltd, as the successful party, sought to recover its legal expenses.
KENNETH DAVID ROHAN v DAMAN REAL ESTATE CAPITAL PARTNERS [2014] DIFC CA 005/2013 — Final determination on appellate costs (17 December 2014)
The litigation involved a complex real estate dispute between Kenneth David Rohan, Andrew James Mostyn Pugh, Michelle Gemma Mostyn Pugh, Stuart James Cox, and Ahmed Zaki Beydoun against Daman Real Estate Capital Partners Limited and Asteco Property Management LLC.
DAMAN REAL ESTATE CAPITAL PARTNERS v KENNETH DAVID ROHAN [2013] DIFC CA 005 — Court of Appeal rejects conditional strike-out of appeal (15 December 2013)
The dispute arises from a real estate investment matter where Daman Real Estate Capital Partners Limited (the Appellant) sought to challenge a lower court judgment. Following the initial ruling, the Respondents—Kenneth David Rohan, Andrew James Mostyn Pugh, Michelle Gemma Mostyn Pugh, and Stuart…
KENNETH DAVID ROHAN v DAMAN REAL ESTATE CAPITAL PARTNERS [2014] DIFC CA 005 — Reopening an appeal due to procedural oversight (24 April 2014)
The DIFC Court of Appeal grants permission to reopen an appeal, ensuring that the Appellant’s arguments regarding Force Majeure and contractual termination are fully adjudicated following a procedural failure to address key grounds.
ORAN v OVED [2025] DIFC CA 004 — The limits of DIFC injunctive power (28 October 2025)
The lawsuit centers on a contractual dispute arising from air ambulance services provided by Oved, a UK-incorporated company, to the late Mr Oran and his agent, Mr Oaken. Following a disagreement over substantial fees paid for the transport of the late Mr Oran’s wife from Switzerland to South…
MR ORAN v OVED [2025] DIFC CA 004 — Assessment of costs following successful jurisdictional challenge (08 December 2025)
Following the Court of Appeal’s decision to discharge an anti-suit injunction and uphold the Appellants' jurisdictional objection, H.E. Chief Justice Wayne Martin conducted an immediate assessment of costs, awarding the Appellants AED 720,000.
AMIRA C FOODS INTERNATIONAL DMCC v IDBI BANK [2021] DIFC CA 004 — Procedural timeline adjustment for appellate skeleton arguments (21 April 2021)
The dispute concerns the appellate timeline for the submission of supplementary skeleton arguments following the Respondent’s filing of a Notice and Skeleton Argument on 28 March 2021.
AMIRA C FOODS INTERNATIONAL DMCC v IDBI BANK [2021] DIFC CA 004 — Procedural timeline adjustment for appellate skeleton arguments (12 April 2021)
The dispute concerns an appeal brought by Amira C Foods International DMCC and Karan A Chanana against IDBI Bank Limited. The matter before the Court of Appeal involves the management of complex appellate filings, specifically the exchange of supplementary skeleton arguments.
DEYAAR DEVELOPMENT v NATIONAL BONDS CORPORATION [2016] DIFC CA 004 — Clarifying the trigger for enforcement fees (02 June 2016)
The dispute arose from enforcement proceedings (ENF-030-2015) initiated by National Bonds Corporation against Deyaar Development following two earlier judgments in CFI-014-2010, which collectively ordered Deyaar to pay over AED 227 million.
HANA AL HERZ v DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE AUTHORITY [2014] DIFC CA 004 — Procedural directions on employment gratuity and damages (22 May 2014)
The dispute centers on the employment relationship between Hana Al Herz and the Dubai International Financial Centre Authority. The litigation concerns the Appellant’s entitlement to end-of-service gratuity and potential damages arising from an alleged breach of Article 56 of the DIFC Employment…
SHAHAB HAIDER v ERNST & YOUNG MIDDLE EAST [2012] DIFC CA 004 — Court of Appeal order for insolvency disclosure (24 January 2012)
The dispute centered on the Liquidator’s efforts to gather information critical to the administration of Orion Holding Overseas Limited (in liquidation). Shahab Haider, acting in his capacity as Liquidator, sought to compel Ernst & Young Middle East (E&Y) to produce a wide array of records…
SANDRA HOLDING v FAWZI MUSAED AL SALEH [2023] DIFC CA 003 — Procedural consolidation of costs and payment return applications (18 October 2023)
The litigation involves a complex family and corporate dispute between Sandra Holding Ltd and Nuri Musaed Al Saleh (the Claimants/Respondents) and Fawzi Musaed Al Saleh, Ahmed Fawzi Al Saleh, Yasmine Fawzi Al Saleh, and Farah El Merabi (the Defendants/Appellants).
SANDRA HOLDING v FAWZI MUSAED AL SALEH [2023] DIFC CA 003 — Procedural scheduling for appellate costs (12 October 2023)
The litigation involves a complex multi-party dispute between Sandra Holding Ltd and Nuri Musaed Al Saleh (as Claimants/Respondents) and Fawzi Musaed Al Saleh, Ahmed Fawzi Al Saleh, Yasmine Fawzi Al Saleh, and Farah El Merabi (as Defendants/Appellants).
TATIANA MIKHAVILOVNA AKHMEDOVA v FARKHAD TEIMUR OGLY AKHMEDOV [2018] DIFC CA 003 — jurisdictional limits on freezing injunctions (28 May 2018)
The litigation centers on a complex enforcement effort initiated by Tatiana Mikhavilovna Akhmedova against her former spouse, Farkhad Teimur Ogly Akhmedov, and a Liechtenstein-incorporated entity, Straight Establishment.
BOCIMAR INTERNATIONAL N.V. v EMIRATES TRADING AGENCY [2017] DIFC CA 003 — Procedural directions for appellate filings (03 April 2017)
The litigation involves a commercial disagreement between Bocimar International N.V. and Emirates Trading Agency LLC, which has escalated to the appellate level within the DIFC Courts.