LITT
Try LITT free
JONATHAN DAVID SHEPPARD v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2026] DIFC CFI 025 — Assessment of costs following dismissed appeal (24 March 2026)
The DIFC Court of First Instance provides a clear reminder on the limits of recoverable legal fees, emphasizing that hourly rates must strictly adhere to Practice Direction caps and that "copy-paste" drafting across concurrent cases warrants a reduction in billable hours.
JONATHAN DAVID SHEPPARD v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2026] DIFC CFI 025 — Dismissal of renewed application for permission to appeal (29 January 2026)
The dispute centers on the contractual rights of Jonathan David Sheppard, the former Chief Technology Officer of Sadapay Technologies, following his attempt to exercise an option to acquire restricted shares. The conflict arose after Mr.
JONATHAN DAVID SHEPPARD v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2025] DIFC CFI 025 — Costs assessment following refused permission to appeal (16 December 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance provides a critical reminder on proportionality and the assessment of legal costs when counsel manages multiple linked proceedings simultaneously.
JONATHAN DAVID SHEPPARD v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2025] DIFC CFI 025 — Refusal of permission to appeal regarding employment limitation periods (20 November 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies that the restrictive limitation periods under the DIFC Employment Law do not apply to all employment-related disputes, specifically excluding contractual claims regarding share valuation.
JONATHAN DAVID SHEPPARD v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2025] DIFC CFI 025 — Clarifying the distinction between employment remuneration and share incentive plan breaches (19 September 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies that disputes arising from share incentive plans are not inherently 'employment claims' under the DIFC Employment Law, potentially shielding such actions from the strict six-month limitation period.