Latest articles
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2023] DIFC CFI 028 — Enforcement of foreign judgment and the scope of the Enforcement Principle (04 July 2023)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the jurisdictional boundaries of the "Enforcement Principle" and the limits of corporate veil piercing when seeking to maintain a worldwide freezing order against foreign entities linked to a local DIFC establishment.
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2023] DIFC CFI 028 — Discharge of freezing order (19 June 2023)
The litigation concerns a complex multi-party dispute initiated by Globe Investment Holdings Limited against five respondents: Commercial Bank of Dubai, Hortin Holding Limited, Lodge Hill Limited, Westdene Investment Limited, and VS 1897 (Cayman) Limited.
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2023] DIFC CFI 028 — Procedural management of a freezing order return date (19 May 2023)
The court’s order of 19 May 2023 serves as a critical procedural milestone in the ongoing dispute between Globe Investment Holdings Limited and the five named Respondents, including Commercial Bank of Dubai.
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2023] DIFC CFI 028 — Worldwide Freezing Order against corporate respondents (03 May 2023)
The lawsuit involves a high-value commercial claim brought by Globe Investment Holdings Limited against five respondents, including the Commercial Bank of Dubai and four corporate entities: Hortin Holding Limited, Lodge Hill Limited, Westdene Investment Limited, and VS 1897 (Cayman) Limited.
MALEIK v MALHO [2022] DIFC CFI 028 — Enforceability of security deposit clauses in membership contracts (14 June 2022)
The dispute arose from a membership contract entered into on 27 December 2021, which granted the Appellant access to the Respondent’s fleet of pleasure boats for a monthly fee of AED 2,000.
FIVE HOLDING v QATAR INSURANCE COMPANY [2024] DIFC CFI 028 — Consent order on costs (25 April 2024)
The dispute involved a claim brought by Five Holding Limited and Five Hotel FZE against Qatar Insurance Company. Following the dismissal of the proceedings, the parties were tasked with determining the quantum of legal costs owed by the Claimants to the Defendant.
FIVE HOLDING v QATAR INSURANCE COMPANY [2024] DIFC CFI 028 — Consent order dismissing proceedings following JJC jurisdictional determination (28 March 2024)
The dispute originated from an insurance-related claim filed by Five Holding Limited and Five Hotel FZE against Qatar Insurance Company on 21 February 2021. The claimants sought relief through the DIFC Court of First Instance, eventually obtaining a default judgment on 14 March 2021.
FIVE HOLDING v QATAR INSURANCE COMPANY [2021] DIFC CFI 028 — Interim costs assessment following default judgment (13 September 2021)
The dispute arose following a successful application for default judgment by Five Holding Limited and Five Hotel FZE against Qatar Insurance Company. Having secured a judgment on 14 March 2021, the Claimants sought to recover their legal expenses incurred during the proceedings.
FIVE HOLDING v QATAR INSURANCE COMPANY [2021] DIFC CFI 028 — Registrar orders payment on account for costs (09 September 2021)
The dispute arose from the Claimants' unsuccessful attempt to lift a stay of proceedings previously ordered by H.E. Justice Omar Al Muhairi on 14 April 2021. Following the dismissal of this "Stay Application" by Justice Wayne Martin on 4 August 2021, the Defendant was awarded its costs.
FIVE HOLDING v QATAR INSURANCE COMPANY [2021] DIFC CFI 028 — Stay of proceedings pending Joint Judicial Committee determination (14 April 2021)
The dispute between Five Holding and Qatar Insurance Company reached a critical procedural juncture when the Defendant, Qatar Insurance Company, initiated a challenge regarding the appropriate forum for the litigation.
FIVE HOLDING v QATAR INSURANCE COMPANY [2021] DIFC CFI 028 — Procedural management of default judgment and jurisdiction challenges (11 April 2021)
The dispute arises from a default judgment granted by the DIFC Court of First Instance on 14 March 2021 in favor of the Claimants, Five Holding Limited and Five Hotel FZE, against the Defendant, Qatar Insurance Company.
FIVE HOLDING v QATAR INSURANCE COMPANY [2021] DIFC CFI 028 — Default judgment for AED 25 million (14 March 2021)
The litigation involved a substantial insurance claim brought by Five Holding Limited and Five Hotel FZE against Qatar Insurance Company. While the underlying facts of the insurance policy dispute were not detailed in the final order, the claimants sought a judgment for the sum of AED 25,000,000.
AMIN LAKHANI v MANISH SRIVASTAVA [2019] DIFC CFI 028 — Default Costs Certificate issuance (16 January 2019)
The dispute arises from the underlying litigation in CFI-028-2018, which culminated in a Default Judgment issued by Judicial Officer Maha Al Mehairi on 28 June 2018. Following the successful judgment, the Claimant, Amin Lakhani, initiated the process to recover legal costs by filing a Notice of…
AMIN LAKHANI v MANISH SRIVASTAVA [2018] DIFC CFI 028 — Default judgment for breach of debt guarantee (28 June 2018)
The lawsuit centered on a breach of contract claim initiated by Amin Lakhani against Manish Srivastava. The dispute arose from the defendant’s failure to honor financial obligations stipulated in a formal legal instrument executed on 24 August 2017.
ESSAM ABDULAMIR HAMADI AL FADHLI AL TAMIMI v JORUM [2017] DIFC CFI 028 — Settlement and discontinuance of property-related claims (23 November 2017)
The litigation initiated by Essam Abdulamir Hamadi Al Fadhli Al Tamimi against Jorum Limited and First Grade Properties Limited centered on a complex commercial disagreement, the specifics of which were ultimately resolved through a private settlement agreement.
ESSAM ABDULAMIR HAMADI ALFADHLI AL TAMIMI v JORUM [2017] DIFC CFI 028 — Setting aside default judgment based on real prospect of success (16 July 2017)
The litigation arose from a claim for the repayment of funds that the Claimant, Essam Abdulamir Hamadi AlFadhli Al Tamimi, asserted were provided to the Defendants, Jorum Limited and First Grade Properties Limited, under two interest-free loan agreements.
DR JAGDIP SINGH v CREDIT SUISSE AG [2015] DIFC CFI 028 — Failure to serve claim form (26 February 2015)
The litigation initiated by Dr Jagdip Singh against Credit Suisse AG (Dubai Branch) under case number CFI 028/2014 was brought to an abrupt conclusion due to a fundamental failure to adhere to the Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC) regarding the service of the Claim Form.
GLOBAL TRADEWAVES LIMITED v STANDARD CHARTERED BANK [2014] DIFC CFI 028 — Indefinite stay of proceedings by consent (28 May 2014)
The litigation involved Global Tradewaves Limited, a company currently in liquidation, initiating a claim against Standard Chartered Bank. While the specific underlying commercial cause of action—whether related to trade finance, banking facilities, or alleged breaches of duty—remained…
GLOBAL TRADEWAVES LIMITED v STANDARD CHARTERED BANK [2014] DIFC CFI 028 — Procedural status of insolvency applications (05 January 2014)
The lawsuit concerns the liquidation of Global Tradewaves Limited, which initiated proceedings against Standard Chartered Bank under case number CFI 028/2013. The dispute centers on the liquidators' efforts to secure information or assets necessary for the administration of the company's estate.
KBH KAANUUN v RICHARD WILLIAM WHEATLEY [2013] DIFC CFI 028 — Consent Order (12 March 2013)
The litigation identified as CFI 028/2012 involved a claim brought by KBH Kaanuun against Richard William Wheatley. While the substantive allegations and the specific monetary value of the claim were shielded from the public record by the parties’ decision to resolve the matter through a…
CLIFFORD CHANCE v GULF HOLDING COMPANY [2013] DIFC CFI 028 — Default judgment for unpaid legal fees (13 May 2013)
Judicial Officer Maha AlMehairi grants a default judgment in favor of Clifford Chance LLP for outstanding professional fees totaling over US$ 845,000 against Gulf Holding Company.
CLIFFORD CHANCE v GULF HOLDING COMPANY [2013] DIFC CFI 028 — Procedural failure in default judgment applications (09 May 2013)
The dispute centers on a procedural application filed by the Claimant, Clifford Chance LLP, seeking a default judgment against the Defendant, Gulf Holding Company. The application was brought before the Court of First Instance on 28 April 2013, invoking the mechanisms provided under the Rules of…
CLIFFORD CHANCE v GULF HOLDING COMPANY [2013] DIFC CFI 028 — Affirmation of exclusive DIFC jurisdiction (25 March 2013)
The dispute centers on a claim for unpaid legal fees brought by Clifford Chance LLP against Gulf Holding Company. The defendant, Gulf Holding Company, sought to challenge the authority of the DIFC Courts to hear the matter, filing an application on 5 December 2012 that contested the court's…
CLIFFORD CHANCE v GULF HOLDING COMPANY [2013] DIFC CFI 028 — Dismissal of interlocutory application (27 February 2013)
The dispute arises from a claim brought by the international law firm Clifford Chance LLP against Gulf Holding Company. While the underlying merits of the substantive claim involve professional service fees and contractual obligations, the specific matter before the court on 27 February 2013…