LITT
Try LITT free
TVM CAPITAL HEALTHCARE PARTNERS v ALI AKBAR HASHEMI [2014] DIFC CFI 045 — Stay of costs assessment pending appeal (07 August 2014)
The dispute arose following a judgment delivered on 22 May 2014 in favor of TVM Capital Healthcare Partners Limited, which included a costs order in their favor. The defendant, Ali Akbar Hashemi, subsequently filed an application for permission to appeal.
TVM CAPITAL HEALTHCARE PARTNERS v ALI AKBAR HASHEMI [2014] DIFC CFI 045 — procedural extension for appellate filings (04 June 2014)
This order addresses the procedural requirements for extending the deadline to file an appeal notice against a judgment delivered by the Court of First Instance.
TVM Capital Healthcare Partners v Ali Akbar Hashemi [2012] DIFC CFI 045 — Breach of confidentiality and Wrotham Park damages (22 May 2014)
The dispute arose from investment discussions between TVM Capital Healthcare Partners Limited and Mr. Ali Akbar Hashemi regarding the potential acquisition of ProVita International Medical Centre, a specialized healthcare provider in Abu Dhabi.
TVM CAPITAL MENA v ALI AKBAR HASHEMI [2014] DIFC CFI 045 — Withdrawal of interlocutory application during trial (26 March 2014)
This order formalizes the dismissal of a contested interlocutory application following its mid-trial withdrawal by the Defendant, clarifying the procedural treatment of associated costs.
TVM CAPITAL MENA v ALI AKBAR HASHEMI [2014] DIFC CFI 045 — enforcing disclosure obligations (10 February 2014)
The dispute centers on the adequacy of the Defendant’s compliance with standard disclosure obligations within the ongoing litigation of CFI 045/2012. TVM Capital Mena Limited sought judicial intervention after the Defendant, Ali Akbar Hashemi, failed to provide a transparent account of his document…
TVM CAPITAL MENA v ALI AKBAR HASHEMI [2013] DIFC CFI 045 — Production Order regarding Redfern Schedule disclosure (03 December 2013)
The dispute centers on the Claimant’s, TVM Capital MENA Limited, attempt to compel the Defendant, Ali Akbar Hashemi, to fulfill his disclosure obligations during the pre-trial phase of the litigation.