LITT
Try LITT free
EMIRATES REIT v INDEX TOWER RESIDENTIAL BODY CORPORATE [2016] DIFC CFI 030 — Permission to appeal a costs order (14 June 2016)
The dispute in CFI 030/2015 originated from a broader litigation between the Claimant, Emirates Reit (CEIC) Limited, and the two Defendants: Index Tower Residential Body Corporate and Associa Mena Owners Association Services.
EMIRATES REIT v INDEX TOWER RESIDENTIAL BODY CORPORATE [2016] DIFC CFI 030 — Costs order following unreasonable conduct (12 April 2016)
The dispute centered on the governance of the Index Tower, specifically the Claimant’s objection to an Annual General Meeting (AGM) scheduled for 27 October 2015. Emirates Reit (CEIC) Limited, as a stakeholder, sought to prevent the meeting from proceeding, arguing that the procedural conduct of…
EMIRATES REIT v INDEX TOWER RESIDENTIAL BODY CORPORATE [2016] DIFC CFI 030 — Adjournment of AGM proceedings (06 March 2016)
The dispute centered on the governance and administrative control of the Index Tower residential development, specifically concerning the scheduling and legitimacy of an Annual General Meeting (AGM) originally slated for 27 October 2015.
FIRSTRAND PROPERTY HOLDING v DAMAC PARK TOWERS [2015] DIFC CFI 030 — Order of Discontinuance (03 November 2015)
The litigation involved a commercial dispute between Firstrand Property Holding (Middle East) Limited, acting as the Claimant, and DAMAC Park Towers Company Limited, the Defendant. While the specific underlying contractual or tortious claims were not detailed in the final order, the case was filed…
FIRSTRAND PROPERTY HOLDING v DAMAC PARK TOWERS COMPANY [2015] DIFC CFI 030 — Consent order staying proceedings (29 September 2015)
The litigation involved a claim brought by Firstrand Property Holding (Middle East) Limited against DAMAC Park Towers Company Limited. While the underlying merits of the dispute were not ventilated in a public judgment due to the parties reaching a settlement, the case was filed under the Court of…
FIRSTRAND PROPERTY HOLDING v DAMAC PARK TOWERS COMPANY [2015] DIFC CFI 030 — Procedural timeline adjustment for the exchange of pleadings (15 June 2015)
A procedural consent order refining the litigation timetable for the exchange of amended pleadings between Firstrand Property Holding and DAMAC Park Towers Company.
FIRSTRAND PROPERTY HOLDING v DAMAC PARK TOWERS [2015] DIFC CFI 030 — Procedural refinement and pleading amendments (19 April 2015)
The dispute between Firstrand Property Holding (Middle East) Limited and Damac Park Towers Company Limited centers on a commercial disagreement regarding property holdings and contractual obligations.
FIRSTRAND PROPERTY HOLDING v DAMAC PARK TOWERS [2015] DIFC CFI 030 — Strike out ruling on real estate development disputes (02 April 2015)
This ruling addresses the boundaries of pleading agency and tortious duties in the context of off-plan property development disputes within the DIFC.
FIRSTRAND PROPERTY HOLDING v DAMAC PARK TOWERS COMPANY [2015] DIFC CFI 030 — Case Management Order (22 January 2015)
The litigation involves a commercial dispute between Firstrand Property Holding (Middle East) Limited and Damac Park Towers Company Limited. While the underlying substantive claims remain confidential, the court file indicates that the parties are engaged in a complex civil action requiring…
FIRSTRAND PROPERTY HOLDING v DAMAC PARK TOWERS COMPANY [2014] DIFC CFI 030 — Setting aside default judgment (25 November 2014)
This order clarifies the procedural threshold for setting aside a default judgment in the DIFC Courts when a defence has been submitted in proximity to the entry of judgment.
FIRSTRAND PROPERTY HOLDING v DAMAC PARK TOWERS COMPANY [2014] DIFC CFI 030 — Stay of enforcement pending set-aside application (16 November 2014)
The dispute arises from a default judgment issued on 29 October 2014 in favor of Firstrand Property Holding (Middle East) Limited against Damac Park Towers Company Limited. Following the entry of this judgment, Firstrand sought to initiate the execution process to recover the sums awarded.
FIRSTRAND PROPERTY HOLDING v DAMAC PARK TOWERS COMPANY [2014] DIFC CFI 030 — Default judgment for USD 11.4 million (29 October 2014)
The litigation arose from a commercial claim initiated by Firstrand Property Holding (Middle East) Limited against Damac Park Towers Company Limited. The claimant sought recovery of a specified sum of money, totaling USD 11,461,813.
HORMUZD MANA v CLARIDEN LEU ASSET MANAGEMENT [2014] DIFC CFI 030 — Dismissal of appeal against Registrar decisions (29 August 2014)
The lawsuit, initiated under claim number CFI 030/2011, centers on a series of procedural challenges brought by the Claimants, Mr Hormuzd Mana and Mrs Shireen Mana, against the Respondent, Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd.
HORMUZD MANA v CLARIDEN LEU ASSET MANAGEMENT [2011] DIFC CFI 030 — Procedural appeal regarding Registrar’s 'Unless Order' sanctions (29 August 2013)
The dispute originated from an investment loss suffered by the Claimants, Hormuzd and Shireen Mana, who had deposited US$150,000 with the Respondent, Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd.
HORMUZD MANA v CLARIDEN LEU ASSET MANAGEMENT [2013] DIFC CFI 030 — Procedural strike out of late skeleton arguments (31 March 2013)
The dispute centers on the procedural conduct of the Appellants, Mr. Hormuzd Mana and Mrs. Shireen Mana, in their ongoing litigation against Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd.
HORMUZD MANA v CLARIDEN LEU ASSET MANAGEMENT [2013] DIFC CFI 030 — procedural stay pending appeal of Registrar’s costs assessment (05 March 2013)
The litigation between Hormuzd and Shireen Mana and Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Limited originated from a substantive dispute that eventually devolved into a secondary, high-stakes battle over the assessment of legal costs.
HORMUZD MANA v CLARIDEN LEU ASSET MANAGEMENT [2013] DIFC CFI 030 — Registrar order on cost assessment (10 January 2013)
The litigation between the Claimants, Mr. Hormuzd Mana and Mrs. Shireen Mana, and the Respondent, Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd, reached a procedural impasse concerning the recovery of legal costs.
MANA MANA v CLARIDEN LEU ASSET MANAGEMENT [2012] DIFC CFI 030 — Procedural management of pleadings and cost applications (04 April 2012)
The litigation in CFI 030/2011 involved a dispute where the Claimants, Mana Mana and Shireen Mana, sought a judicial extension of time to finalize their Reply to the Defence submitted by the Defendant, Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd.
JSA LAW v NEZAR FREENY [2010] DIFC CFI 030 — Summary assessment of legal costs (03 March 2010)
The lawsuit centered on the recovery of legal costs incurred by the Claimant, JSA Law Limited, during the course of proceedings against multiple respondents, including Nezar Freeny and Amanah Holding Corp.
JSA LAW v NEZAR FREENY [2010] DIFC CFI 030 — Consent Order regarding legal costs (15 February 2010)
The lawsuit involved a multi-party dispute where JSA Law Limited sought recovery of legal costs incurred during the litigation process against several defendants, including Nezar Freeny, Amanah Holding Corp, Dr Ahmad Mohammed R Alsolaim, Interkey Company for Communication and Computer LLC, and…
JSA LAW v NEZAR FREENY [2009] DIFC CFI 030 — Consent order regarding cost assessment (13 December 2009)
The lawsuit, initiated by JSA Law Limited, involved a complex multi-party dispute featuring Nezar Freeny and Amanah Holding Corp as the first and second defendants, and Dr. Ahmad Mohammed R Alsolaim and Interkey Company for Communication and Computer LLC as the third and fourth defendants.
JSA LAW v NEZAR FREENY [2009] DIFC CFI 030 — Interim preservation and electronic service orders (10 November 2009)
The dispute centers on a Part 8 Claim filed by JSA Law Limited against five defendants: Nezar Freeny, Amanah Holding Corp, Dr. Ahmad Mohammed R Alsolaim, Interkey Company for Communication and Computer LLC, and Amanah Xdata LLC.
EFG v Marj Holding [2025] DIFC CFI 029 — Material non-disclosure and contempt sanctions (27 August 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the stringent requirements for ex parte freezing injunctions, discharging a 3.6 million euro claim-backed order due to material non-disclosure and imposing contempt fines.
EFG v Marj Holding [2025] DIFC CFI 029 — Refusal of permission to appeal following discharge of freezing injunction (11 June 2025)
The dispute originated from the Claimants' urgent application for a worldwide freezing order (WWF Order) against the Defendants, which was initially granted by H.E. Justice Roger Stewart on 10 March 2025.