LITT
Try LITT free
SALEM DWELA v DAMAC PARK TOWERS COMPANY [2020] DIFC CA 009 — Procedural directions on the application of the Law of Obligations (30 November 2020)
The litigation arises from a property-related dispute between the Appellant, Mr. Salem Dwela, and the Respondent, Damac Park Towers Company. The core of the disagreement involves the contractual and legal obligations governing the relationship between the parties, specifically concerning the…
VTJ Limited v Mohammed Ammar Al Hassan [2018] DIFC CA 009 — Appellate reversal on specific performance and the burden of proof for fraud (06 November 2018)
The Court of Appeal overturned a first-instance dismissal, enforcing a real estate Memorandum of Understanding after finding that the trial judge improperly inferred fraud without evidence.
AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP UK LIMITED v QATAR INSURANCE CO. [2024] DIFC CA 008 — Procedural extension for costs assessment (07 October 2024)
The dispute originated from a Part 7 claim initiated on 14 January 2022, involving a consortium of seven major insurance entities—American International Group UK Limited (as transferee of AIG Europe Limited), Markel Syndicate Management Limited, Talbot Underwriting Limited, Berkshire Hathaway…
ACTINA FZCO v STANDARD CHARTERED BANK [2018] DIFC CA 008 — Procedural adjournment and case management strategy (05 September 2018)
The Court of Appeal mandates a strategic pause in appellate proceedings to facilitate the amendment of pleadings in the underlying CFI action.
LARA BASEM MUSA KHOURY v MASHREQ BANK [2022] DIFC CA 007 — strict adherence to service time limits and deemed service rules (28 November 2022)
The Court of Appeal confirms that the four-month service window under RDC 7.20 is mandatory and that deemed dates of service under RDC 9.27 are irrebuttable, effectively barring a US$6 million claim against Mashreq Bank.
RADA TRADING v WEALTH BRIDGE TRADING [2021] DIFC CA 007 — Consent order for stay of proceedings (01 August 2021)
The dispute involves Rada Trading LLC FZC, acting as the Claimant/Respondent, and two corporate entities: Wealth Bridge Trading Crude Oil and Refined Products Abroad LLC (First Defendant) and Cohenrich Energy FZE (Second Defendant/Appellant).
GRAND VALLEY GENERAL TRADING v GGICO SUNTECK [2019] DIFC CA 007 — Setting aside default judgments for improper service (11 November 2019)
The dispute arose from a deadlocked joint venture, GGICO Sunteck Limited (GSL), between Grand Valley General Trading LLC (GVGL) and Sunteck Lifestyles Limited (SLL). GVGL obtained a default judgment dissolving GSL without SLL being a party to the proceedings.
DAS REAL ESTATE v FIRST ABU DHABI BANK [2019] DIFC CA 007 — Assessment of legal costs following appellate litigation (28 August 2019)
The assessment of costs in this matter represents the culmination of a multi-layered legal battle between Das Real Estate, owned and represented by Mussabeh Salem Mussabeh Humaid AlMuhairi, and First Abu Dhabi Bank (formerly National Bank of Abu Dhabi).
DAS REAL ESTATE v NATIONAL BANK OF ABU DHABI [2018] DIFC CA 007 — Amendment of costs orders following appellate judgment (03 July 2018)
The dispute centered on the clarity and completeness of the costs order issued by the Court of Appeal in its judgment dated 12 April 2018. Following the delivery of that judgment, the Respondent, National Bank of Abu Dhabi (NBAD), identified an ambiguity or omission regarding whether the costs…
DAMAC PARK TOWERS COMPANY v AMIT DATTANI [2019] DIFC CA 007 — Finalizing costs assessment via consent order (08 July 2019)
The litigation originated from a real estate dispute involving Damac Park Towers Company (formerly trading as Damac Real Estate Asset Management Company) and four individual claimants: Mr Amit Dattani, Mr Nitin Jobanputra, Mr Masood Ur Rahman, and Mr Shemhon Iftakhar.
DAMAC PARK TOWERS COMPANY v AMIT DATTANI [2015] DIFC CA 007 — Procedural extension of time for appellate filings (04 January 2015)
The litigation involves a complex property-related dispute originating from the Court of First Instance under claim number CFI-034-2012. The appellant, Damac Park Towers Company Limited—formerly trading as Damac Real Estate Asset Management Company Limited—is engaged in appellate proceedings…
AMIT DATTANI v DAMAC PARK TOWERS COMPANY [2015] DIFC CA 007 — Appellate confirmation of termination rights for incomplete real estate units (10 November 2015)
The DIFC Court of Appeal affirms that developers cannot force completion on purchasers when common areas remain unsafe or essential operational infrastructure is missing, reinforcing strict standards for "readiness for occupation" under DIFC Contract Law.
TR88HOUSE RESTAURANT AND ENTERTAINMENT CENTER v BOND INTERIOR DESIGN [2024] DIFC CA 006 — Consent order correcting double-counted retentions (21 August 2024)
The litigation centered on a construction contract dispute where the primary point of contention, following the initial judgment by Justice Wayne Martin, involved the calculation of retentions.
AL RIHAB REAL ESTATE COMPANY v EMIRATES NBD BANK [2021] DIFC CA 006/2020 — Registrar clarifies requirements for payment of costs on account (23 December 2021)
The dispute centered on the Defendant’s (Emirates NBD Bank) attempt to secure an order for payment of costs on account following the conclusion of appellate proceedings. Having succeeded in the Court of Appeal, the Bank sought to recover its legal costs, but the Registrar found the documentation…
AL RIHAB REAL ESTATE COMPANY v EMIRATES NBD BANK [2021] DIFC CA 006 — Appellate cost allocation for security applications (01 November 2021)
The litigation between Al Rihab Real Estate Company and Emirates NBD Bank centers on a high-stakes banking and real estate dispute that reached the Court of Appeal under reference CA 006/2020.
AL RIHAB REAL ESTATE COMPANY v EMIRATES NBD BANK [2021] DIFC CA 006 — Procedural order regarding withdrawal of legal representation (05 August 2021)
The litigation involves an appeal brought by Al Rihab Real Estate Company against Emirates NBD Bank. While the underlying substantive dispute remains active, the immediate procedural matter concerned the status of the Appellant’s legal counsel.
AL RIHAB REAL ESTATE COMPANY v EMIRATES NBD BANK [2022] DIFC CA 006 — release of escrowed security funds (02 March 2022)
The dispute centered on the status of funds held by the DIFC Courts as security during the pendency of appeal proceedings under case number CA 006/2020. Al Rihab Real Estate Company, acting as the Appellant, had previously been required to transfer a substantial sum into the DIFC Courts’ Escrow…
AL RIHAB REAL ESTATE COMPANY v EMIRATES NBD BANK [2022] DIFC CA 006 — Interim payment of costs order (28 January 2022)
The dispute centered on the Respondent’s request for an interim payment following the conclusion of proceedings in CA 006/2020. Having submitted a Draft Bill of Costs on 26 January 2022, Emirates NBD Bank PJSC sought an immediate payment on account from the Appellant, Al Rihab Real Estate Company…
MAG FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC v THERON ENTERTAINMENT LLC [2019] DIFC CA 006 — Compelling document production via Redfern Schedule (08 April 2019)
This order clarifies the procedural threshold for document production in the DIFC Court of Appeal, enforcing strict compliance with Redfern Schedule obligations under RDC 28.16.
MAG Financial Services v Theron Entertainment [2018] DIFC CA 006 — Ruling on costs following appeal (07 May 2018)
The dispute centered on a tenancy contract and subsequent claims for damages arising from delays in obtaining a change of use for the premises. Theron Entertainment LLC initially sought significant damages, which the Court noted were substantial in the context of the overall litigation.
FRONTLINE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS v ASIF HAKIM ADIL [2016] DIFC CA 006 — Court of Appeal rejects security for costs application (31 October 2016)
The litigation between Frontline Development Partners Limited and Asif Hakim Adil concerns a procedural battle within the appellate framework of the DIFC Courts. While the underlying substantive claim remains distinct, this specific interlocutory dispute centered on the Respondent’s attempt to…
TVM Capital Mena v Ali Akbar Hashemi [2014] DIFC CA 006 — Appellate adjustment of trial costs (25 December 2014)
The litigation between TVM Capital Mena Limited and Ali Akbar Hashemi originated in the Court of First Instance under claim number CFI 045/2012. While the substantive merits of the underlying claim were addressed in the order of Justice Roger Giles dated 22 May 2014, the subsequent appeal focused…
TVM CAPITAL HEALTHCARE PARTNERS v ALI AKBAR HASHEMI [2015] DIFC CA 006 — Consent order for costs settlement (09 March 2015)
The litigation between TVM Capital Healthcare Partners Limited and Ali Akbar Hashemi involved a complex dispute that originated in the Court of First Instance under CFI-045-2012. Following a judgment delivered by Justice Roger Giles on 22 May 2014, the Claimant was awarded costs subject to specific…
DAMAN REAL ESTATE CAPITAL PARTNERS v AHMED ZAKI BEYDOUN [2014] DIFC CA 006 — Reopening an appeal due to judicial oversight (26 March 2014)
The dispute centered on the validity of a termination notice issued by the Respondent, Ahmed Zaki Beydoun, concerning a residential apartment in a DIFC development. The Appellant, Daman Real Estate Capital Partners, had entered into a Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) with the Respondent.