LITT
Try LITT free
OZAN v OWAIN [2026] DIFC ARB 029 — The self-contained nature of RDC Part 43 enforcement
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies that the summary enforcement regime for arbitral awards remains insulated from the procedural requirements of RDC Part 12, even when a jurisdictional challenge is active.
LIKITIF v LUVAUN [2022] DIFC ARB 028 — The mandatory dismissal of court claims subject to arbitration agreements (25 October 2022)
The DIFC Court affirms its commitment to the primacy of arbitration agreements by dismissing a multi-million dirham construction claim for lack of jurisdiction.
NALANI v NETTY [2025] DIFC ARB 027 — The High Cost of Procedural Obstruction in Enforcement Proceedings (2 October 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the limits of recoverable costs in arbitration enforcement, emphasizing judicial discretion in assessing proportionality despite compliant hourly rates.
NALANI v NETTY [2025] DIFC ARB 027 — The High Cost of Procedural Obstruction in Enforcement Proceedings (22 September 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance reaffirms the finality of enforcement orders, dismissing a defendant’s attempt to use repetitive procedural applications to stall the detailed assessment of costs.
NALANI v NETTY [2025] DIFC ARB 027 — The High Cost of Procedural Obstruction in Enforcement Proceedings (15 May 2025)
The DIFC Court affirms the enforceability of arbitral awards incorporating procedural orders, reinforcing the finality of enforcement judgments against dilatory challenges.
NALANI v NETTY [2025] DIFC ARB 027 — The High Cost of Procedural Obstruction in Enforcement Proceedings (26 February 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance reaffirms the sanctity of procedural timelines, rejecting a defendant’s attempt to stay enforcement proceedings pending a jurisdictional challenge.
LUDHYAN v LUCINA [2020] DIFC ARB 027 — The High Cost of Defying the Supervisory Seat (19 November 2020)
The DIFC Court of First Instance issues a suspended committal order against a defendant and its representative for persistent non-compliance with court-ordered mandates in an arbitration-related dispute.
LUDHYAN v LUCINA [2020] DIFC ARB 027 — Anti-suit injunction against parallel Dubai Court proceedings (08 November 2020)
The dispute centered on the enforceability of an arbitration agreement contained within a construction subcontract. Ludhyan, the Applicant, sought to protect its right to arbitrate a dispute arising from the Subcontract Agreement (reference no.
ONORATA v ONSLOWE [2026] DIFC ARB 026 — Assessment of costs following a failed set aside application (11 February 2026)
The litigation arose from an application by the Claimants—Onorata, Opall, and Opalina—to set aside a final arbitral award rendered in a DIAC arbitration. Following the dismissal of their application by the Court, the Defendant, Onslowe, sought to recover the legal costs incurred in defending the…
ONORATA v ONSLOWE [2026] DIFC ARB 026 — The limits of jurisdictional challenges to arbitral awards (07 January 2026)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies that the characterisation of a dispute as 'employment-related' does not automatically oust an arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction where the core matter concerns shareholder affairs and company management.
MUWARN v MIHAD [2023] DIFC ARB 025 — Clarifying procedural timelines for arbitral award enforcement (10 January 2023)
The DIFC Court clarifies the procedural nature of enforcement challenges, confirming that extensions of time for defendants do not constitute a 're-opening' of claims and that enforcement remains 'opposed' for fee purposes when a set-aside application is pending.
OLYMPIO v OLWIN [2026] DIFC ARB 024 — Renewed application for permission to appeal following CJT intervention (24 March 2026)
The litigation stems from two separate gasoline trade contracts entered into by the parties in 2003, both governed by English law. The breakdown of these commercial relationships triggered distinct arbitration proceedings, resulting in cross-awards that form the basis of the current jurisdictional…
OLYMPIO v OLWIN [2025] DIFC ARB 024 — The Limits of Procedural Obstruction in the Shadow of the CJT (28 August 2025)
Assistant Registrar Hayley Norton dismisses a misconceived urgent application, clarifying that RDC Part 25 cannot be weaponized to secure a stay of proceedings pending Conflicts of Jurisdiction Tribunal (CJT) intervention.
OLYMPIO v OLWIN [2025] DIFC ARB 024 — Costs assessment following a Worldwide Freezing Order (15 August 2025)
The dispute between Olympio and Olwin centered on the Claimant’s successful application for a Worldwide Freezing Order (WFO) to protect the integrity of the underlying arbitration process.
OLYMPIO v OLWIN [2025] DIFC ARB 024 — The limits of procedural obstruction in the shadow of the CJT (07 August 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies that the mere registration of a jurisdictional conflict claim before the Conflicts of Jurisdiction Tribunal (CJT) does not trigger an automatic stay of ongoing enforcement proceedings.
OCTAVIA v OISIN [2025] DIFC ARB 023 — The Standard of Reasonableness in Post-Enforcement Costs Recovery
This order clarifies the DIFC Court’s approach to assessing costs in uncontested enforcement proceedings, affirming the recoverability of professional fees when they align with market standards.
MUHALLAM v MUHAF [2024] DIFC ARB 021 — Contempt of court and sequestration for non-compliance with arbitral award enforcement (28 August 2024)
The litigation arises from the Claimant’s efforts to enforce a provisional arbitral award issued in DIAC Arbitration No. 60 of 2022. The underlying dispute involves a substantial claim of USD 90,826,522.
MUHALLAM v MUHAF [2023] DIFC ARB 021 — The Enforceability of Interim Measures as Arbitral Awards
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies that interim measures issued by an arbitral tribunal, when framed as an award, fall within the scope of Articles 42 and 43 of the DIFC Arbitration Law, regardless of the seat of arbitration.
NOVAK v NEWLAND [2024] DIFC ARB 020 — Permission to appeal granted on public policy challenges to arbitral enforcement
The DIFC Court of First Instance grants permission to appeal, acknowledging the systemic importance of reconciling DIFC enforcement orders with conflicting onshore Dubai Court injunctions.
NOVAK v NEWLAND [2024] DIFC ARB 020 — Enforcement of arbitral awards amidst third-party insolvency (01 August 2024)
The dispute arose from a series of construction contracts between Novak (the employer) and Newton (the contractor). Following Newton’s insolvency, Novak sought payment under six separate guarantees provided by Newland.
NAATIQ v NABEEH [2024] DIFC ARB 018 — Stay of proceedings pending Judicial Committee determination (25 September 2024)
A procedural analysis of the stay of DIFC proceedings pending a determination by the Judicial Committee for Resolving Conflicts of Jurisdiction under Decree 29 of 2024.
Nuriel v Nuzhat [2024] DIFC ARB 018 — Final Anti-Suit Injunction and Arbitration Agreement Validity (04 September 2024)
The DIFC Court of First Instance confirms that general references to arbitration clauses in amended agreements satisfy the "Clarity Test," granting a final anti-suit injunction to restrain parallel proceedings in the Abu Dhabi Courts.
LATHOR v LIUFAN [2022] DIFC ARB 018 — Enforcement of DIAC residential tenancy award (14 November 2022)
The dispute centered on the enforcement of a Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) award issued on 25 October 2022. The claimant, Lathor, sought to recover possession of a residential apartment (Apartment No.
OM v OTTILIE [2025] DIFC ARB 017 — Assessment of costs following a failed jurisdictional challenge (10 November 2025)
The dispute arose following the successful defense by OM against a jurisdictional challenge initiated by OTTILIE. After the Court dismissed the Defendant’s application on 28 October 2025, the Claimant sought recovery of its legal and administrative expenses.