LITT
Try LITT free
BARCLAYS BANK PLC v HAMAD SUHAIL O AL KHAILI [2020] DIFC CFI 086 — Alternative service via electronic channels (26 October 2020)
Barclays Bank PLC initiated proceedings against His Excellency Hamad Suhail O Al Khaili and Mr Ibrahim Daoud Jaffal to facilitate the service of a Part 8 Application. The dispute centers on the enforcement of obligations related to a banking account held by the First Defendant with the Claimant.
BARCLAYS BANK PLC v HIS EXCELLENCY HAMAD SUHAIL O AL KHAILI [2020] DIFC CFI 086 — Alternative service via WhatsApp and email (22 October 2020)
The lawsuit concerns a banking dispute initiated by Barclays Bank PLC against two defendants: His Excellency Hamad Suhail O Al Khaili (the First Defendant) and Mr Ibrahim Daoud Jaffal (the Second Defendant).
BARCLAYS BANK PLC v HIS EXCELLENCY HAMAD SUHAIL. O. AL KHAILI [2020] DIFC CFI 086 — Strict evidentiary standards for alternative service (21 October 2020)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the high threshold for granting alternative service via digital channels, emphasizing that general email addresses and unverified mobile numbers are insufficient for procedural compliance.
RAK CERAMICS v ASSALA DEVELOPMENT [2022] DIFC CFI 086 — Procedural withdrawal of legal representation (23 November 2022)
This order addresses the procedural requirements for legal counsel to formally withdraw from representing a party in ongoing litigation before the DIFC Court of First Instance.
RAK CERAMICS P.J.S.C. v ASSALA DEVELOPMENTS SARL [2019] DIFC CFI 086 — Enforcement of settlement agreement and guarantor liability (06 October 2022)
The DIFC Court of First Instance affirms the enforceability of settlement agreements and the liability of non-signatory guarantors who participate in commercial negotiations.
RAK CERAMICS v ASSALA DEVELOPMENT [2021] DIFC CFI 086 — Extension of time for service of claim form (02 May 2021)
The litigation between RAK Ceramics P.J.S.C and Assala Development SARL, registered under CFI 086/2019, reached a procedural juncture in early 2021 regarding the validity of service.
RAK CERAMICS v ASSALA DEVELOPMENT [2021] DIFC CFI 086 — Extension of time for service of claim form (05 January 2021)
The dispute between RAK Ceramics and Assala Development, registered under CFI 086/2019, centers on the Claimant’s efforts to progress its litigation within the DIFC Court of First Instance.
RAK CERAMICS v ASSALA DEVELOPMENT [2020] DIFC CFI 086 — Extension of time for service of claim form (08 July 2020)
The DIFC Court of First Instance grants a procedural extension for the service of a claim form, reinforcing the court's case management discretion under the Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC).
DAIKAN DMCC v POKE AND CO RESTAURANT [2024] DIFC CFI 085 — Final Costs Certificate assessment (02 October 2024)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the procedural requirements for cost recovery, rejecting a request for a Default Costs Certificate in favor of a substantive assessment of the Second Claimant’s Bill of Costs.
DAIKAN DMCC v POKE AND CO RESTAURANT [2024] DIFC CFI 085 — Refusal of permission to appeal on jurisdictional and quantum grounds (23 April 2024)
The litigation arises from a commercial dispute involving Daikan DMCC and Salih Elmascan (the Claimants) against Poke and Co Restaurant Ltd and two individual defendants, Khaled Mohamed Abdel Mageed and Rannia El-basyuni.
DAIKAN DMCC v POKE AND CO RESTAURANT [2024] DIFC CFI 085 — Immediate judgment on personal loan liability (28 February 2024)
The dispute centered on the repayment of funds provided by the Second Claimant, Salih Elmascan, to the Second Defendant, Khaled Mohamed Abdel Mageed, under an informal arrangement conducted via WhatsApp and telephone.
DAIKAN DMCC v POKE AND CO RESTAURANT [2024] DIFC CFI 085 — Refusal of ex-parte freezing order (03 January 2024)
The dispute arises from a Part 8 Claim filed on 29 November 2023 by Daikan DMCC and Salih Elmascan against Poke and Co Restaurant, Khaled Mohamed Abdel Mageed, and Rannia El-basyuni.
SALEM MOHAMMED BALLAMA ALTAMIMI v EMIRATES NBD BANK [2022] DIFC CFI 085 — Registrar strikes out appeal for procedural non-compliance (06 April 2022)
The litigation, initiated under case number CFI 085/2021, involves a complex multi-party dispute featuring three Claimants—Salem Mohammed Ballama Altamimi, David Nigel Croll Stark, and Paul James Leggett—against a consortium of seventeen financial institutions, including Emirates NBD Bank, HSBC…
SALEM MOHAMMED BALLAMA ALTAMIMI v EMIRATES NBD BANK [2022] DIFC CFI 085 — Indemnity costs for meritless litigation conduct (28 March 2022)
The litigation involved a complex web of claims brought by Salem Mohammed Ballama Altamimi, David Nigel Croll Stark, and Paul James Leggett against a consortium of seventeen financial institutions, including Emirates NBD Bank, HSBC Bank Middle East, and various other regional and international…
SALEM MOHAMED BALLAMA ALTAMIMI v EMIRATES NBD BANK [2021] DIFC CFI 085 — Procedural extension for reply evidence (07 December 2021)
The litigation involves a claim brought by Salem Mohamed Ballama Altamimi against a consortium of ten financial institutions, including Emirates NBD Bank PJSC, HSBC Bank Middle East Limited, ICICI Bank Limited, ICICI Bank UK PLC, Union Bank of India, Bank of Jordan Company, National Bank of Bahrain…
AL AHLI BANK OF KUWAIT v CENTURION INVESTMENTS [2022] DIFC CFI 085 — Immediate judgment granted against defaulting defendants (20 December 2022)
The DIFC Court of First Instance affirms its jurisdictional reach and rejects unsubstantiated forgery claims in a multi-million dollar banking enforcement action.
AL AHLI BANK OF KUWAIT v CENTURION INVESTMENTS [2022] DIFC CFI 085 — Procedural withdrawal of legal representation (18 July 2022)
The litigation, initiated by Al Ahli Bank of Kuwait K.S.C.P. (DIFC Branch), involves a substantial dispute against a wide array of entities and individuals, including Centurion Investments, H.E.
LAVISH v LUHAN [2021] DIFC CFI 085 — Judicial independence regarding foreign insolvency stays (26 October 2021)
The litigation concerns a substantial financial claim brought by the Claimant, a bank operating within the DIFC, against ten Defendants. The core of the dispute arises from an alleged default under a Facility Agreement, through which the Claimant advanced funds to the First Defendant, Centurion…
AL AHLI BANK OF KUWAIT KSCP v CENTURION INVESTMENTS [2021] DIFC CFI 085 — Stay of proceedings pending Joint Judicial Committee determination (13 January 2021)
The DIFC Court of First Instance mandates a stay of proceedings in a complex multi-party banking dispute, deferring to the Joint Judicial Committee to resolve jurisdictional conflicts between the DIFC and Dubai Courts.
AL AHLI BANK OF KUWAIT v CENTURION INVESTMENTS [2020] DIFC CFI 085 — Procedural extension for complex multi-party litigation (22 December 2020)
The litigation involves Al Ahli Bank of Kuwait KSCP (DIFC Branch) as the Claimant, pursuing claims against a broad array of ten respondents, including Centurion Investments, various investment entities, and individual defendants such as Saeed Mohamed Butti Mohamed Alqebaisi and Khaleefa Butti Omair…
CITY STARS TRADING CRUDE OIL AND REFIND PROUDUCTS v LANGUR HOLDING CORPORATION S.L [2026] DIFC CFI 084 — Unless Order and Security for Costs (12 February 2026)
The DIFC Court of First Instance imposes a strict financial ultimatum on the Claimant, mandating payment of outstanding costs and substantial security for costs to remedy a pattern of procedural non-compliance.
CITY STARS TRADING CRUDE OIL AND REFIND PROUDUCTS v LANGUR HOLDING CORPORATION S.L [2025] DIFC CFI 084 — Stay of proceedings pending proof of legal representative's employment status (23 June 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance has stayed proceedings in a commercial dispute, mandating that the Claimant provide official Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratisation (MOHRE) documentation to verify the employment status of its representative, Mr Ali Abualhasan.
CITY STARS TRADING CRUDE OIL AND REFIND PROUDUCTS v LANGUR HOLDING CORPORATION S.L [2025] DIFC CFI 084 — Procedural sanction for unauthorized representation (26 May 2025)
This order addresses the critical requirement for corporate entities to provide verifiable proof of authority for non-legal practitioner representatives, imposing a stay of proceedings and significant costs for non-compliance.
IDBI BANK v DTC COMMODITY DMCC [2023] DIFC CFI 084 — Default judgment for multi-million dollar banking debt (16 June 2023)
The lawsuit concerns a substantial financial recovery action initiated by IDBI Bank Limited against DTC Commodity DMCC (formerly known as Top Worth International Steels DMCC) and two individual defendants, Mr. Ashwin Narendra Lodha and Mr. Abhay Narendra Lodha.