Latest articles
HORMUZD MANA v CLARIDEN LEU ASSET MANAGEMENT [2013] DIFC CFI 030 — procedural stay pending appeal of Registrar’s costs assessment (05 March 2013)
The litigation between Hormuzd and Shireen Mana and Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Limited originated from a substantive dispute that eventually devolved into a secondary, high-stakes battle over the assessment of legal costs.
HORMUZD MANA v CLARIDEN LEU ASSET MANAGEMENT [2013] DIFC CFI 030 — Registrar order on cost assessment (10 January 2013)
The litigation between the Claimants, Mr. Hormuzd Mana and Mrs. Shireen Mana, and the Respondent, Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd, reached a procedural impasse concerning the recovery of legal costs.
MANA MANA v CLARIDEN LEU ASSET MANAGEMENT [2012] DIFC CFI 030 — Procedural management of pleadings and cost applications (04 April 2012)
The litigation in CFI 030/2011 involved a dispute where the Claimants, Mana Mana and Shireen Mana, sought a judicial extension of time to finalize their Reply to the Defence submitted by the Defendant, Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd.
JSA LAW v NEZAR FREENY [2010] DIFC CFI 030 — Summary assessment of legal costs (03 March 2010)
The lawsuit centered on the recovery of legal costs incurred by the Claimant, JSA Law Limited, during the course of proceedings against multiple respondents, including Nezar Freeny and Amanah Holding Corp.
JSA LAW v NEZAR FREENY [2010] DIFC CFI 030 — Consent Order regarding legal costs (15 February 2010)
The lawsuit involved a multi-party dispute where JSA Law Limited sought recovery of legal costs incurred during the litigation process against several defendants, including Nezar Freeny, Amanah Holding Corp, Dr Ahmad Mohammed R Alsolaim, Interkey Company for Communication and Computer LLC, and…
JSA LAW v NEZAR FREENY [2009] DIFC CFI 030 — Consent order regarding cost assessment (13 December 2009)
The lawsuit, initiated by JSA Law Limited, involved a complex multi-party dispute featuring Nezar Freeny and Amanah Holding Corp as the first and second defendants, and Dr. Ahmad Mohammed R Alsolaim and Interkey Company for Communication and Computer LLC as the third and fourth defendants.
JSA LAW v NEZAR FREENY [2009] DIFC CFI 030 — Interim preservation and electronic service orders (10 November 2009)
The dispute centers on a Part 8 Claim filed by JSA Law Limited against five defendants: Nezar Freeny, Amanah Holding Corp, Dr. Ahmad Mohammed R Alsolaim, Interkey Company for Communication and Computer LLC, and Amanah Xdata LLC.
EFG v Marj Holding [2025] DIFC CFI 029 — Material non-disclosure and contempt sanctions (27 August 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the stringent requirements for ex parte freezing injunctions, discharging a 3.6 million euro claim-backed order due to material non-disclosure and imposing contempt fines.
EFG v Marj Holding [2025] DIFC CFI 029 — Refusal of permission to appeal following discharge of freezing injunction (11 June 2025)
The dispute originated from the Claimants' urgent application for a worldwide freezing order (WWF Order) against the Defendants, which was initially granted by H.E. Justice Roger Stewart on 10 March 2025.
SMIT LAMNALCO v AIROLINK INTERNATIONAL CONSTRUCTION [2022] DIFC CFI 029 — strict adherence to RDC service protocols (18 September 2022)
The dispute centers on the procedural threshold for effecting service of process upon a defendant within the DIFC jurisdiction. Smit Lamnalco Limited, acting as the Claimant, initiated proceedings against Airolink International Construction LLC under Claim No. CFI 029/2022.
SMIT LAMNALCO v AIROLINK INTERNATIONAL CONSTRUCTION [2022] DIFC CFI 029 — Default judgment for unpaid construction invoices (31 August 2022)
The dispute centers on a claim for unpaid invoices arising from a commercial relationship between the claimant, Smit Lamnalco Limited, and the defendant, Airolink International Construction LLC.
PHENIX CONSULTING v ARK CAPITAL MANAGEMENT [2021] DIFC CFI 029 — Settlement-driven discontinuance (23 March 2021)
The litigation involved Phenix Consulting FZE as the Claimant, initiating proceedings against three distinct Respondents: ARK Capital Management (Dubai) Limited, ARK Capital Limited, and Apex Fund Services (Dubai) Limited.
MS ALEXANDRA WILSON v SIMMONS & SIMMONS MIDDLE EAST [2021] DIFC CFI 029 — Consent order staying proceedings (03 March 2021)
The litigation initiated by Ms Alexandra Wilson against Simmons & Simmons Middle East LLP and Mr Syed Raza Abbas Rizvi involved a claim brought before the DIFC Court of First Instance.
MS ALEXANDRA WILSON v SIMMONS & SIMMONS MIDDLE EAST [2021] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural timeline adjustment via consent order (27 January 2021)
The litigation under case number CFI 029/2020 involves a claim brought by Ms Alexandra Wilson against Simmons & Simmons Middle East LLP and Mr Syed Raza Abbas Rizvi. While the underlying substantive merits of the claim are not detailed in this specific procedural order, the matter has reached the…
MS ALEXANDRA WILSON v SIMMONS & SIMMONS MIDDLE EAST [2021] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural framework for employment litigation (19 January 2021)
This Agreed Case Management Order establishes the comprehensive procedural roadmap for the employment dispute between Ms Alexandra Wilson and Simmons & Simmons Middle East, mandating psychiatric expert evidence and judicial mediation.
MS ALEXANDRA WILSON v SIMMONS & SIMMONS MIDDLE EAST [2021] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural amendment to case management timeline (13 January 2021)
The litigation involves a claim brought by Ms Alexandra Wilson against Simmons & Simmons Middle East LLP and Mr Syed Raza Abbas Rizvi. The dispute, filed under case number CFI 029/2020, reached a juncture where the parties sought to modify the existing procedural timeline established by the Court.
MS ALEXANDRA WILSON v SIMMONS & SIMMONS MIDDLE EAST [2020] DIFC CFI 029 — Judicial mediation procedural order (14 December 2020)
This order formalizes the framework for court-annexed mediation in an employment dispute, establishing strict protocols for virtual proceedings, confidentiality, and the mediator’s role.
MS ALEXANDRA WILSON v SIMMONS & SIMMONS MIDDLE EAST [2020] DIFC CFI 029 — Case management directions by consent (23 November 2020)
The lawsuit involves a claim brought by Ms Alexandra Wilson against Simmons & Simmons Middle East LLP and Mr Syed Raza Abbas Rizvi. While the specific quantum of the claim is not detailed in the initial case management order, the litigation centers on allegations of employment-related grievances…
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2023] DIFC CFI 029 — Costs assessment following employment and tort litigation (30 October 2023)
The litigation involved a complex interplay between employment law claims and tortious allegations. Mr. Hamid, the former employee, initiated a counterclaim against The Industrial Group (TIG) seeking compensation for notice pay, end-of-service gratuity, accrued vacation, and statutory penalties…
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2023] DIFC CFI 029 — Consent dismissal of costs assessment payment application (23 June 2023)
The dispute centered on the procedural funding required to initiate the formal assessment of legal costs following the underlying litigation in CFI 029/2018. The Defendant, Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid, had filed Application No.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2023] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural timeline extension for Consolidated Costs Assessment (26 May 2023)
The litigation between The Industrial Group and Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid has been a protracted affair involving multiple layers of procedural history, including substantive CFI proceedings and subsequent appellate review.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2023] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural extension for consolidated costs assessment (11 May 2023)
The litigation between The Industrial Group and Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid has been a protracted matter involving multiple stages of proceedings, including both the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2023] DIFC CFI 029 — Consolidation of costs assessment procedures (24 March 2023)
The dispute between The Industrial Group and Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid has been a long-standing fixture in the DIFC Courts, involving multiple procedural stages, including default judgment challenges and disclosure disputes.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2023] DIFC CFI 029 — Post-judgment interest and cost assessment guidance (10 March 2023)
The dispute centered on the Defendant’s entitlement to interest on a penalty sum of AED 244,640, which had been the subject of previous appellate proceedings. Following the Court of Appeal’s decision in CA-005-2022, which remitted the interest application to the trial judge, Justice Sir Richard…