LITT
Try LITT free
HANA AL HERZ v DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE AUTHORITY [2015] DIFC CFI 011 — Costs and the rejection of English Employment Tribunal practice (03 November 2015)
The litigation arose from the termination of the Claimant’s employment in a senior management position. Following the termination on 31 January 2012, Hana Al Herz initiated proceedings against the Dubai International Financial Centre Authority, seeking a broad range of remedies.
HANA AL HERZ v DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE AUTHORITY [2012] DIFC CFI 011 — Employment discrimination and termination dispute (10 July 2013)
The Claimant, Hana Al Herz, sought legal redress following her suspension and subsequent termination by the DIFC Authority (DIFCA). Her primary contention was that the employer’s actions were not merely a response to a perceived conflict of interest, but were rooted in discriminatory practices…
HANA AL HERZ v DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE AUTHORITY [2012] DIFC CFI 011 — Case Management Order (28 August 2012)
The litigation between Hana Al Herz and the Dubai International Financial Centre Authority (DIFCA) concerns a dispute brought before the Court of First Instance under case number CFI-011/2012.
HANA AL HERZ v DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE AUTHORITY [2012] DIFC CFI 011 — Procedural extension and cost assessment (09 May 2012)
The dispute in CFI 011/2012 centered on a procedural application regarding the timeline for the filing of the Defence. Hana Al Herz, acting as the Claimant, found herself in a position where the standard procedural deadlines required adjustment, necessitating a formal application to the Court of…
AMARJEET SINGH DHIR v WATERFRONT PROPERTY INVESTMENT [2009] DIFC CFI 011 — Discharge of stay and grant of leave to appeal (08 July 2009)
The underlying dispute in CFI 011/2009 involves Amarjeet Singh Dhir (the Applicant) and the Respondents, Waterfront Property Investment Limited and Linarus FZE. Following an adverse ruling on 11 June 2009, the Applicant sought to maintain a stay of execution to prevent the immediate enforcement of…
AMARJEET SINGH DHIR v WATERFRONT PROPERTY INVESTMENT [2009] DIFC CFI 011 — Discharge of freezing injunction and liability for damages (11 June 2009)
The lawsuit concerns a property-related dispute where the Applicant, Amarjeet Singh Dhir, sought to restrain the Respondents, Waterfront Property Investment Limited and Linarus FZE, from dealing with certain assets.
AMARJEET SINGH DHIR v WATERFRONT PROPERTY INVESTMENT [2009] DIFC CFI 011 — Stay of disclosure obligations pending return date (19 May 2009)
The dispute arises from a series of claims brought by Amarjeet Singh Dhir, Five River Properties LLC, and Renaissance Holdings and Developers FZE against Waterfront Property Investment Limited and Linarus FZE.
AMARJEET SINGH DHIR v WATERFRONT PROPERTY INVESTMENT [2009] DIFC CFI 011 — Procedural directions for evidence and skeleton arguments (17 May 2009)
The litigation involves Amarjeet Singh Dhir as the Applicant against two Respondents: Waterfront Property Investment Limited and Linarus FZE. While the underlying merits of the claim are not detailed in this specific direction, the case is part of a broader series of proceedings concerning asset…
AMARJEET SINGH DHIR v WATERFRONT PROPERTY INVESTMENT [2009] DIFC CFI 011 — Procedural management of interlocutory applications (14 May 2009)
The DIFC Court of First Instance establishes a strict timeline for written submissions to resolve procedural disputes without the need for an oral hearing.
AMARJEET SINGH DHIR v WATERFRONT PROPERTY INVESTMENT [2009] DIFC CFI 011 — Freezing injunction and asset disclosure order (23 April 2009)
The lawsuit concerns an application for a freezing injunction initiated by Amarjeet Singh Dhir against two respondents: Waterfront Property Investment Limited and Linarus FZE. The core of the dispute involves the protection of specific real estate assets located in the Dubai Waterfront development,…
FURSA CONSULTING v BAY GATE INVESTMENT [2026] DIFC CFI 010 — Procedural failure in costs assessment (23 January 2026)
This order clarifies the strict procedural requirements for obtaining a Default Costs Certificate in the DIFC Courts, emphasizing that general application notices cannot bypass mandatory filing protocols.
NIGEL v NASRI [2024] DIFC CFI 010 — Joinder of parties and agency liability in contract disputes (15 July 2024)
The dispute centers on the Claimant’s attempt to expand the scope of its litigation by adding "Nadim" as a Second Defendant to an existing breach of contract claim against "Nasri." The Claimant argued that Nadim was either a direct party to the engagement letter or acted as an agent for the…
MIKHART v MERAF [2023] DIFC CFI 010 — Interest and costs recovery following default judgment (22 September 2023)
This order clarifies the court's approach to rectifying calculation errors in particulars of claim when awarding post-judgment interest and costs in undefended proceedings.
LYLE v LAMAR [2022] DIFC CFI 010 — Employment contract formation and jurisdictional nexus (11 March 2022)
The dispute originated from an employment claim filed by the Claimant, Lyle, against two entities: Lamar (the First Defendant, a DIFC-registered entity) and Lamarluther (the Second Defendant, an English-registered parent company).
NORDIN v MINWALLA [2023] DIFC CFI 010 — Final discontinuance following amicable settlement (30 March 2023)
The litigation involved a complex multi-party dispute initiated on 19 January 2021. The Claimants, comprising Laurent Bernard Nordin, Patrick Claude Georges Thiriet, Nasr-eddine Benaissa, and the corporate entity Deep Blue Advisors Limited, sought legal recourse against the Defendant, Darayus Happy…
LAURENT BERNARD NORDIN v DARAYUS HAPPY MINWALLA [2023] DIFC CFI 010 — Suspension of trial pending settlement conditions (03 March 2023)
The DIFC Court of First Instance formalizes a stay of proceedings in a multi-party dispute, contingent upon the defendant meeting specific settlement conditions.
NORDIN v MINWALLA [2022] DIFC CFI 010 — Trial preparation and procedural directions (15 December 2022)
Following a Progress Monitoring Hearing, the DIFC Court of First Instance formalizes the procedural roadmap for the upcoming trial between Laurent Bernard Nordin and Darayus Happy Minwalla.
LAURENT BERNARD NORDIN v DARAYUS HAPPY MINWALLA [2022] DIFC CFI 010 — Agreed Case Management Order (27 July 2022)
The litigation, involving four claimants—Laurent Bernard Nordin, Patrick Claude Georges Thiriet, Nasr-eddine Benaissa, and Deep Blue Advisors Limited—against the defendant, Darayus Happy Minwalla, requires a high degree of evidentiary organization.
LAURENT BERNARD NORDIN v DARAYUS HAPPY MINWALLA [2021] DIFC CFI 010 — Procedural refinement via consent order (21 September 2021)
The litigation, registered under case number CFI 010/2021, involves a multi-party claim brought by Laurent Bernard Nordin, Patrick Claude Georges Thiriet, Nasr-eddine Benaissa, and Deep Blue Advisors Limited against the respondent, Darayus Happy Minwalla.
NORDIN v MINWALLA [2021] DIFC CFI 010 — Procedural bar to default judgment following late-filed defence (16 March 2021)
The dispute involves four claimants—Laurent Bernard Nordin, Patrick Claude Georges Thiriet, Nasr-eddine Benaissa, and Deep Blue Advisors Limited—who initiated proceedings against the defendant, Darayus Happy Minwalla, under case number CFI 010/2021.
ABN AMRO BANK v N/A [2017] DIFC CFI 010 — Variation of cross-border business transfer scheme (29 April 2017)
The application in CFI 010/2017 arose from the necessity to refine the operational scope of a previously sanctioned business transfer scheme. ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (the Applicant) sought to amend the "Client List"—the definitive schedule of client accounts intended for transfer to the Transferee, LGT…
ABN AMRO BANK N.V. v N/A [2017] DIFC CFI 010 — Judicial sanction of a cross-border private banking business transfer (11 April 2017)
The lawsuit involved an application by ABN Amro Bank N.V. (the "Transferor") to transfer a portion of its global private banking business to LGT Bank (Singapore) Ltd (the "Transferee") pursuant to a Sale and Purchase Agreement dated 6 December 2016.
ABN AMRO BANK N.V. v N/A [2017] DIFC CFI 010 — Sanctioning a cross-border business transfer scheme (10 April 2017)
The lawsuit concerned a formal application by ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (the "Applicant") to sanction a scheme of arrangement for the transfer of a portion of the business conducted by its DIFC branch to LGT Bank (Singapore) Ltd (the "Transferee").
ABN AMRO BANK v N/A [2017] DIFC CFI 010 — Procedural framework for cross-border business transfers (08 March 2017)
The Court granted ABN AMRO Bank N.V. leave to proceed with a "Further Application" under Article 108(1) of the DIFC Regulatory Law to sanction the transfer of its DIFC branch business to LGT Bank (Singapore) Ltd.