LITT
Try LITT free
DARIO COSTANTINO SPALLONE v ALESSANDRO PEDERSOLI [2021] DIFC CFI 091 — Consent order staying proceedings (21 April 2021)
The litigation in CFI 091/2019 involves a complex dispute between the Claimants, Dario Costantino Spallone and Mattia Bodini, and the Defendant, Alessandro Pedersoli. While the specific underlying causes of action remain shielded by the confidential nature of the consent order, the case represents…
DARIO COSTANTINO SPALLONE v ALESSANDRO PEDERSOLI [2021] DIFC CFI 091 — Consent order staying proceedings (01 February 2021)
The litigation under CFI 091/2019 involves two claimants, Dario Costantino Spallone and Mattia Bodini, pursuing legal action against the defendant, Alessandro Pedersoli. While the specific underlying causes of action remain confidential within the public record of this consent order, the procedural…
DARIO COSTANTINO SPALLONE v ALESSANDRO PEDERSOLI [2020] DIFC CFI 091 — Agreed Case Management Order (23 December 2020)
The lawsuit, registered under CFI 091/2019, involves two claimants, Dario Costantino Spallone and Mattia Bodini, against the defendant, Alessandro Pedersoli. While the underlying substantive claims remain private, the matter reached a critical juncture in late 2020 when a previous stay of…
DARIO COSTANTINO SPALLONE v ALESSANDRO PEDERSOLI [2020] DIFC CFI 091 — Consent order staying proceedings (24 September 2020)
The lawsuit involves a dispute between the Claimants, Dario Costantino Spallone and Mattia Bodini, and the Defendant, Alessandro Pedersoli. While the underlying substantive claims remain private, the court record indicates that the litigation had reached a stage involving active case management and…
DARIO COSTANTINO SPALLONE v ALESSANDRO PEDERSOLI [2020] DIFC CFI 091 — Judicial rejection of alternative service application (12 April 2020)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the strict threshold for granting alternative service under the Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC) when standard service methods remain available.
Dario Costantino Spallone v Alessandro Pedersoli [2019] DIFC CFI 091 — Default judgment for share transfer (30 March 2020)
The lawsuit centered on a contractual obligation regarding the ownership of shares in Luminal Agency FZ-LLC. The Claimants, Dario Costantino Spallone and Mattia Bodini, sought a court order to compel the Defendant, Alessandro Pedersoli, to transfer his shareholding in the entity to them.
REGISTRAR OF THE DIFC COURTS v SHAUN GREGORY MORGAN [2024] DIFC CFI 090 — Disciplinary sanctions for professional misconduct (15 March 2024)
The lawsuit initiated by the Registrar of the DIFC Courts centered on allegations of professional misconduct by Shaun Gregory Morgan and his firm, Franklin Morgan Legal Advisory LLC.
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2024] DIFC CFI 090 — Dismissal of stay of execution pending appeal (20 May 2024)
The DIFC Court of First Instance confirms that a stay of execution is untenable once the underlying applications for permission to appeal have been dismissed.
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2024] DIFC CFI 090 — Procedural extension for PTA response (04 January 2024)
The litigation in CFI 090/2022 involves a banking dispute between the Claimant, Bank of Singapore Limited, and the Defendants, Marj Holding Limited and Mohammed Ahmad Ramadhan Juma. While the specific underlying commercial claims are not detailed in this procedural order, the case reached a…
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2024] DIFC CFI 090 — Costs allocation following successful immediate judgment (03 January 2024)
This order clarifies the procedural mechanics of cost recovery in the DIFC when a claimant secures immediate judgment on a primary debt claim while a secondary misrepresentation claim remains pending.
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2022] DIFC CFI 090 — Immediate judgment in a USD 55.8 million debt claim (20 November 2023)
The dispute centers on a credit facility agreement entered into in October 2021, under which the Bank of Singapore provided MARJ Holding Limited with revolving short-term advances and trading facilities. Mr.
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2023] DIFC CFI 090 — Procedural variation of consent order deadlines (12 September 2023)
The litigation involves Bank of Singapore Limited as the Claimant against Marj Holding Limited and Mohammed Ahmad Ramadhan Juma as the Defendants. The dispute centers on the Claimant’s pursuit of an Immediate Judgment Application, which was filed on 2 June 2023 under Part 24 of the Rules of the…
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2023] DIFC CFI 090 — Procedural timeline for Part 24 Immediate Judgment (05 September 2023)
The litigation involves a claim brought by Bank of Singapore Limited against Marj Holding Limited and Mohammed Ahmad Ramadhan Juma. While the underlying merits of the claim are not detailed in the procedural order, the case has reached a critical juncture where the Claimant is seeking a summary…
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2023] DIFC CFI 090 — Procedural extension for immediate judgment evidence (21 August 2023)
The litigation involves a claim brought by the Bank of Singapore against Marj Holding Limited and Mohammed Ahmad Ramadhan Juma. The core of the current procedural dispute centers on the Claimant’s pursuit of an Immediate Judgment Application, filed under RDC 24 on 21 June 2023.
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2023] DIFC CFI 090 — Withdrawal of legal representation (20 June 2023)
The dispute in CFI 090/2022 involves a banking claim initiated by Bank of Singapore against Marj Holding Limited and Mohammed Ahmad Ramadhan Juma. The litigation, which falls under the jurisdiction of the DIFC Courts, reached a procedural juncture regarding the status of the Defendants' legal…
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2023] DIFC CFI 090 — Consent order adjourning CMC pending immediate judgment application (19 June 2023)
The litigation involves a banking dispute initiated by Bank of Singapore Limited against Marj Holding Limited and Mohammed Ahmad Ramadhan Juma. While the underlying merits of the claim remain to be fully ventilated in subsequent filings, the procedural posture of the case has been defined by the…
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2023] DIFC CFI 090 — Consent order adjourning CMC pending immediate judgment application (19 May 2023)
The litigation involves Bank of Singapore Limited as the Claimant against two Defendants: Marj Holding Limited and Mohammed Ahmad Ramadhan Juma. While the specific underlying contractual or tortious basis of the claim remains subject to further pleadings, the procedural posture of the case…
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2023] DIFC CFI 090 — Procedural extension via consent order (08 March 2023)
The litigation involves a banking dispute initiated by Bank of Singapore Limited against Marj Holding Limited and Mohammed Ahmad Ramadhan Juma. While the substantive merits of the claim remain pending, the current procedural posture involves the exchange of pleadings.
BANK OF SINGAPORE v MARJ HOLDING [2023] DIFC CFI 090 — Procedural extension for pleadings (14 February 2023)
The litigation involves a banking dispute initiated by Bank of Singapore Limited against Marj Holding Limited and Mohammed Ahmad Ramadhan Juma. While the specific underlying financial claims remain subject to the ongoing pleadings process, the matter has reached a stage where the parties are…
IDBI BANK LIMITED v FAST TELECOM GENERAL TRADING [2025] DIFC CFI 090 — Refusal to lift stay of proceedings pending criminal investigation (03 June 2025)
The litigation arises from a commercial banking dispute involving a Facility Agreement and a Personal Guarantee. The Claimant, IDBI Bank Limited (DIFC Branch), seeks to recover approximately USD 2.3 million from the Fifth Defendant, Mohammed Jawdat Ayesh Mustafa Al Barguthi, who is alleged to have…
IDBI BANK LIMITED v FAST TELECOM GENERAL TRADING [2023] DIFC CFI 090 — Stay of proceedings pending criminal investigation (24 May 2023)
The DIFC Court of First Instance granted a stay of civil proceedings against the Fifth Defendant, Mohammed Jawdat Ayesh Mustafa Al Barguthi, following the production of a Dubai Police forensic report indicating that his signatures on key documents were forged.
IDBI BANK LIMITED v FAST TELECOM GENERAL TRADING [2023] DIFC CFI 090 — Summary judgment and forgery allegations (04 April 2023)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the high evidentiary threshold for summary judgment when a defendant alleges forgery of a personal guarantee, emphasizing that factual disputes requiring trial cannot be resolved through preliminary applications.
IDBI BANK LIMITED v FAST TELECOM GENERAL TRADING [2023] DIFC CFI 090 — Refusal to grant summary judgment on forgery allegations (27 March 2023)
The dispute centers on a claim brought by IDBI Bank against several defendants, including Mr Mohammed Jawdat Ayesh Mustafa Al Barguthi (the Fifth Defendant), to enforce a personal guarantee under a Facilities Agreement dated 4 January 2016.
IDBI BANK LIMITED v MOHAMMED JAWDAT AYESH MUSTAFA AL BARGUTHI [2022] DIFC CFI 090 — Procedural adjournment of Case Management Conference (27 July 2022)
A procedural consent order formalizing the rescheduling of a Case Management Conference and extending document filing deadlines in a multi-party banking dispute.