Latest articles
GRACIELA v GIACOBBE [2016] DIFC CFI 027 — Anonymisation of party identities in court records (16 November 2016)
The dispute in CFI 027/2014 involved an application by the Defendant, Giacobbe, to restrict the public disclosure of his identity in relation to the ongoing litigation against Graciela Limited.
GRACIELA v GIACOBBE [2015] DIFC CFI 027 — Damages and indemnity costs award (09 December 2015)
The dispute centered on a claim brought by Graciela Limited against the Defendant, Giacobbe, which culminated in a judgment delivered on 11 November 2015. Following the court's determination on the merits, the Claimant was awarded a specific sum in damages, which the court subsequently formalized…
GRACIELA v GIACOBBE [2015] DIFC CFI 027 — Indemnity costs for malicious IT sabotage (29 November 2015)
The dispute centered on the liability of the Defendant, Giacobbe, following the successful claim brought by Graciela Limited. Having established the Defendant’s liability in the underlying judgment, the Court moved to quantify the financial relief due to the Claimant.
GRACIELA v GIACOBBE [2015] DIFC CFI 027 — Procedural management of evidence (16 August 2015)
The dispute between Graciela Limited and Giacobbe involves a complex evidentiary phase where the Claimant, Graciela Limited, sought formal leave from the Court to expand the record. By filing Application Notice CFI-027-2014/9 on 9 July 2015, the Claimant requested permission to introduce reply…
GRACIELA v GIACOBBE [2015] DIFC CFI 027 — Document production and Redfern Schedule compliance (05 May 2015)
The litigation between Graciela Limited and the defendant, Giacobbe, reached a critical juncture regarding the scope of discovery. Both parties had filed competing requests for document production, leading to a stalemate that required judicial intervention.
GRACIELA v GIACOBBE [2015] DIFC CFI 027 — Procedural leave to substitute expert witness (26 April 2015)
The core of this procedural dispute involved the Defendant, Giacobbe, seeking formal judicial approval to replace their previously appointed expert witness. In the context of complex litigation under CFI 027/2014, the selection and retention of an expert witness are critical to the presentation of…
GABRIEL LIMITED v GIACOBBE [2015] DIFC CFI 027 — Amended Case Management Order (14 April 2015)
This procedural order details the judicial intervention required to reset the litigation timetable in a commercial dispute, establishing a firm schedule for disclosure, witness evidence, and trial preparation.
GABRIEL LIMITED v GIACOBBE [2015] DIFC CFI 027 — Procedural order for remote testimony (02 April 2015)
The litigation between Gabriel Limited and Giacobbe involves a civil claim currently before the Court of First Instance. As the matter progressed toward trial, the Defendant, Giacobbe, found it necessary to provide oral testimony despite being located in Australia.
GABRIEL LIMITED v GIACOBBE [2015] DIFC CFI 027 — Case Management Order (24 March 2015)
The lawsuit involves a civil claim brought by Gabriel Limited against the defendant, Giacobbe, under the jurisdiction of the DIFC Courts. While the substantive merits of the underlying dispute remain subject to the ongoing proceedings, the matter reached a critical juncture on 24 March 2015 when…
GABRIEL LIMITED v GIACOBBE [2015] DIFC CFI 027 — Judicial refusal to adjourn Case Management Conference (12 February 2015)
The dispute in CFI 027/2014 involves Gabriel Limited as the Claimant and Giacobbe as the Defendant. The specific procedural conflict arose when the Defendant filed an Application Notice, identified as CFI 027-2014/5, on 12 February 2015.
GABRIEL LIMITED v GIACOBBE [2014] DIFC CFI 027 — Stay of enforcement pending set-aside application (16 November 2014)
This order clarifies the procedural interplay between enforcement applications and pending challenges to default judgments within the DIFC Court of First Instance.
GRACIELA v GIACOBBE [2014] DIFC CFI 027 — Default judgment and the rejection of a late defence extension (29 October 2014)
The dispute centered on the procedural timeline following the initiation of proceedings by the Claimant, Graciela Limited, against the Defendant, Giacobbe. The core of the matter involved the Claimant’s pursuit of a default judgment due to the Defendant’s failure to serve a defence within the…
BGC BROKERS L.P v MOURAD ABOURAHIM [2016] DIFC CFI 027 — Default costs certificate enforcement (16 February 2016)
The litigation between BGC Brokers L.P and Mourad Abourahim culminated in a procedural enforcement action regarding the recovery of legal costs. Following the underlying substantive proceedings, BGC Brokers L.P (the Receiving Party) sought to recover its legal expenditures from Mourad Abourahim…
BGC BROKERS L.P. v MOURAD ABOURAHIM [2015] DIFC CFI 027 — Currency conversion and final judgment quantification (11 October 2015)
The lawsuit centered on the enforcement of a loan agreement dated 24 November 2011 between BGC Brokers L.P. and Mourad Abourahim. Following a trial, the Court established the Defendant’s liability for the outstanding balance and contractual interest.
BGC Brokers L.P. v Mourad Abourahim [2015] DIFC CFI 027 — Determining the currency conversion date for loan obligations (06 August 2015)
The dispute arose from a loan agreement between BGC Brokers L.P. and Mourad Abourahim, where the underlying debt was denominated in pounds sterling (GBP). However, when BGC Brokers L.P. initiated proceedings in the DIFC Court of First Instance, the claim was expressed in US dollars (USD).
BGC BROKERS L.P. v MOURAD ABOURAHIM [2014] DIFC CFI 027 — Amended Case Management Order (20 July 2014)
The litigation involves BGC Brokers L.P. as the Claimant and Mourad Abourahim as the Defendant. While the specific underlying causes of action are not detailed in this procedural order, the case is categorized under General Litigation within the DIFC Courts.
BGC BROKERS L.P v MOURAD ABOURAHIM [2014] DIFC CFI 027 — Case Management Order (02 June 2014)
The lawsuit involves a commercial dispute between the claimant, BGC Brokers L.P, and the defendant, Mourad Abourahim. While the specific underlying causes of action are not detailed in the procedural order, the case is classified under General Litigation within the DIFC Court of First Instance.
CHRISTOPHER JAMES MCDUFF v KBH KAANUUN [2016] DIFC CFI 027 — Final distribution of funds held in Court (22 February 2016)
This consent order marks the procedural conclusion of the long-standing dispute in CFI 027/2012, facilitating the release of funds previously held in the DIFC Court’s registry.
CHRISTOPHER JAMES MCDUFF v KBH KAANUUN [2014] DIFC CFI 027 — Denial of leave to appeal and stay of execution (20 April 2014)
The underlying litigation in CFI 027/2012 involves a dispute between the Claimant, Christopher James McDuff, and the Defendant, KBH Kaanuun Limited. Following a judgment delivered by H.E. Justice Ali Al Madhani on 4 March 2014, the Defendant sought to challenge the court's findings.
Christopher James McDuff v KBH Kaanuun [2012] DIFC CFI 027 — Wrongful termination and the limits of summary dismissal (04 March 2014)
The dispute arose from the employment relationship between Christopher James McDuff, a solicitor, and his former employer, KBH Kaanuun Limited. After Mr. McDuff resigned during his probation period and subsequently initiated legal proceedings against the firm to secure his salary, the Defendant…
CHRISTOPHER JAMES MCDUFF v KBH KAANUUN [2012] DIFC CFI 027 — Employment termination and counterclaim liability (13 February 2014)
The dispute centered on the summary dismissal of Mr. McDuff, a solicitor, by his employer, KBH Kaanuun, following the Claimant’s resignation during his probation period. After Mr. McDuff initiated legal proceedings to secure his notice period salary, the firm terminated his employment, citing 25…
CHRISTOPHER JAMES MCDUFF v KBH KAANUUN [2013] DIFC CFI 027 — Procedural directions for trial preparation (16 June 2013)
The court required a structured approach to the finalization of factual evidence to ensure the trial could proceed efficiently. The primary focus was the timely exchange of witness statements to prevent surprise and allow for adequate preparation by opposing counsel.
CHRISTOPHER JAMES MCDUFF v KBH KAANUUN [2013] DIFC CFI 027 — procedural extension for document production (10 March 2013)
The DIFC Court of First Instance grants a procedural extension for document production deadlines in the ongoing dispute between Christopher James McDuff and KBH Kaanuun.
CHRISTOPHER JAMES MCDUFF v KBH KAANUUN [2013] DIFC CFI 027 — Procedural directions for trial preparation (25 February 2013)
The lawsuit involves a civil dispute between the Claimant, Christopher James McDuff, and the Defendant, KBH Kaanuun Limited. While the underlying substantive claims remain confidential within the broader case file, the immediate focus of this order is the management of the litigation process to…