LITT
Try LITT free
BARCLAYS BANK PLC v ESSAR GLOBAL FUND [2017] DIFC CFI 036 — Refusal of permission to appeal enforcement of New York judgment (11 July 2017)
The dispute centers on the enforcement of a substantial foreign judgment obtained by Midtown Acquisitions L.P. and other claimants against Essar Global Fund Limited. The claimants sought to enforce a New York Supreme Court judgment valued at USD 171,769,169 within the DIFC.
BARCLAYS BANK PLC v ESSAR GLOBAL FUND [2017] DIFC CFI 036 — Interim payment of costs on account (29 June 2017)
The litigation, registered under case number CFI-036-2016, involves a multi-party claim brought by Barclays Bank PLC, Credit Suisse Loan Funding LLC, Midtown Acquisitions LP, and Special Situations Investing Group Inc. against the defendant, Essar Global Fund Limited.
BARCLAYS BANK PLC v ESSAR GLOBAL FUND [2017] DIFC CFI 036 — Consent order for procedural extension (21 May 2017)
The litigation involves a complex multi-party dispute between Barclays Bank PLC, Credit Suisse Loan Funding L.L.C., Midtown Acquisitions L.P., and Special Situations Investing Group Inc. against Essar Global Fund Limited.
BARCLAYS BANK PLC v ESSAR GLOBAL FUND [2017] DIFC CFI 036 — Consent order for party removal (02 March 2017)
The litigation, registered under case number CFI 036/2016, originated as a multi-party action brought by four distinct financial entities against Essar Global Fund Limited. The original claimants included Barclays Bank PLC, Credit Suisse Loan Funding L.L.C., Midtown Acquisitions L.P., and Special…
BARCLAYS BANK PLC v ESSAR GLOBAL FUND [2017] DIFC CFI 036 — Concurrent hearing of jurisdiction and immediate judgment applications (02 January 2017)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies that foreign judgment enforcement proceedings do not require the strict procedural separation of jurisdiction and summary judgment hearings typically observed in English practice.
PHILIPPE YVES MOSER v ES BANKERS [2016] DIFC CFI 036 — Denial of leave to appeal due to insolvency procedural failure (07 September 2016)
The claimant, Philippe Yves Moser, sought to challenge an order by H.E. Justice Shamlan Al Sawalehi, which had previously upheld a decision by Judicial Officer Maha Al Mehairi to deny summary judgment against ES Bankers (Dubai) Limited.
PHILIPPE YVES MOSER v ES BANKERS [2016] DIFC CFI 036 — Upholding procedural rigour in insolvency litigation (30 June 2016)
The dispute originated from the insolvency proceedings of ES Bankers (Dubai) Limited. Following the bank’s entry into liquidation, the joint liquidator, Mr. Phil Bowers, rejected a proof of debt submitted by the Claimant, Philippe Yves Moser.
VANNIN CAPITAL PCC PLC v MR RAFED ABDEL MOHSEN BADER AL KHORAFI [2016] DIFC CFI 036 — Finality of interlocutory orders and litigation funding (11 April 2016)
The DIFC Court of First Instance affirms the principle of finality in interlocutory proceedings, denying the Khorafi defendants permission to appeal a refusal to release funds held in court or stay ongoing arbitration.
VANNIN CAPITAL PCC PLC v MR RAFED ABDEL MOHSEN BADER AL KHORAFI [2016] DIFC CFI 036 — Dismissal of application to vary preservation order (11 February 2016)
The DIFC Court of First Instance affirms the stringent requirements for varying interlocutory orders, rejecting attempts to relitigate established preservation measures without new, material evidence.
VANNIN CAPITAL PCC PLC v MR RAFED ABDEL MOHSEN BADER AL KHORAFI [2015] DIFC CFI 036 — Final assessment of costs and waiver of appeal rights (19 November 2015)
The lawsuit centered on the final determination of legal costs owed by the First, Second, and Third Defendants—Mr. Rafed Abdel Mohsen Bader Al Khorafi, Mrs. Amrah Ali Abdel Latif Al Hamad, and Mrs. Alia Mohamed Sulaiman Al Rifai—to the Claimant, Vannin Capital PCC PLC.
VANNIN CAPITAL PCC PLC v AL KHORAFI [2015] DIFC CFI 036 — Interim payment order in detailed cost assessment (10 September 2015)
Judicial Officer Maha Al Mehairi orders a partial payment into Court pending the final determination of a contested bill of costs in a complex multi-party litigation.
EDESSA ENGINEERING v SOLIDERE INTERNATIONAL [2012] DIFC CFI 036 — Procedural termination of construction-related dispute (18 December 2012)
The litigation identified as CFI 036/2012 involved two claimants, Edessa Engineering, Design and Environmental Services S.A.L and Edessa International Offshore S.A., against the respondent, Solidere International Limited.
LOTHAR LUDWIG HARDT v HUSSAIN AL HABIB SAJWANI [2011] DIFC CFI 036 — Final resolution of the long-standing dispute (19 January 2011)
The Court of First Instance formalizes the conclusion of the litigation between Dr. Lothar Ludwig Hardt and Hussain Al Habib Sajwani through a final consent order.
LOTHAR LUDWIG HARDT v HUSSAIN ALI HABIB SAJWANI [2010] DIFC CFI 036 — Jurisdictional strike out and procedural refinement (01 August 2010)
The litigation, initiated by Dr. Lothar Ludwig Hardt and Hardt Trading F.Z.E, faced a significant hurdle regarding the court's authority over the named parties. Following the substantive judgment delivered on 4 April 2010, the court addressed the threshold issue of whether the DIFC Court possessed…
ELI MYDLARZ v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2026] DIFC CFI 035 — Assessment of costs following failed appeal (24 March 2026)
The dispute arose following the dismissal of the Defendant’s Renewed Application for permission to appeal. The Claimant, Eli Mydlarz, submitted a statement of costs totaling AED 59,600 for the work performed in responding to that application.
ELI MYDLARZ v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2026] DIFC CFI 035 — Dismissal of renewed application for permission to appeal (29 January 2026)
The dispute centers on the exercise of share options and the subsequent repurchase of those shares by Sadapay Technologies Ltd. Eli Mydlarz, formerly the Engineering Lead at Sadapay, sought to enforce his rights under a Grant Agreement and Share Incentive Plan (SIP).
ELI MYDLARZ v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2025] DIFC CFI 035 — Costs assessment following refused permission to appeal (16 December 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance provides a critical reminder on the proportionality of legal costs in linked litigation, slashing a claimant’s recovery where time entries for overlapping submissions were deemed excessive.
ELI MYDLARZ v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2025] DIFC CFI 035 — Refusal of permission to appeal regarding employment limitation periods (20 November 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the narrow scope of claims brought "under" the DIFC Employment Law, distinguishing them from broader employment-related contractual disputes.
ELI MYDLARZ v SADAPAY TECHNOLOGIES [2025] DIFC CFI 035 — Characterisation of share incentive claims and limitation periods (19 September 2025)
The lawsuit centered on a jurisdictional challenge brought by Sadapay Technologies Ltd against Eli Mydlarz. The defendant sought to have the claim dismissed on the basis that it was an employment law matter, which would have rendered it time-barred under the strict limitation periods set out in the…
LUEWT v LORTE [2022] DIFC CFI 035 — Appeal against Small Claims Tribunal judgment regarding contractual variations (05 September 2022)
The dispute arose from a construction contract dated 14 July 2021 concerning the development of a stem cell laboratory in Abu Dhabi. LUEWT, acting as a subcontractor to LORTE, performed works and subsequently sought payment for eight separate "variations" that it contended were outside the original…
RAMY BAHY HASSAN ABOUZEID v THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP [2019] DIFC CFI 035 — Formal termination of proceedings via Notice of Discontinuance (20 November 2019)
The litigation initiated under Claim No. CFI-035-2018 involved a legal conflict between the Claimant, Ramy Bahy Hassan Abouzeid, and the Defendant, The Industrial Group Limited. While the underlying substantive merits of the claim—such as the specific contractual breaches or employment-related…
RAMY BAHY HASSAN ABOUZEID v THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP [2019] DIFC CFI 035 — Procedural postponement of Part 50 application (15 October 2019)
The litigation under case number CFI-035-2018 involves a claim brought by Ramy Bahy Hassan Abouzeid against The Industrial Group Limited. While the specific substantive merits of the claim remain confidential within the broader court file, the procedural posture of the case reached a significant…
RAMY BAHY HASSAN ABOUZEID v THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP [2019] DIFC CFI 035 — Dismissal of application to amend court order (08 October 2019)
The litigation in CFI 035/2018 concerns a procedural contest between the Claimant, Ramy Bahy Hassan Abouzeid, and the Defendant, The Industrial Group. The core of the dispute centered on the Defendant’s attempt to alter the legal landscape established by a prior judicial determination.
RAMY BAHY HASSAN ABOUZEID v THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP [2019] DIFC CFI 035 — Dismissal of application for permission to appeal (08 May 2019)
This order confirms the stringent threshold for challenging factual findings and reinforces the non-derogable nature of statutory end-of-service (EOS) entitlements under DIFC employment law.