LITT
Try LITT free
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2021] DIFC CFI 029 — Case Management Order (10 March 2021)
The litigation involves a multi-faceted dispute between The Industrial Group (the Claimant and Counterclaim Defendant) and Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid (the Defendant and Counterclaimant).
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2020] DIFC CFI 029 — Strike out of the 'Meraab Claim' (02 November 2020)
The DIFC Court of First Instance reinforces strict adherence to pleading requirements by striking out a reformulated employment-related claim following the Claimant's failure to comply with previous judicial directions.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2020] DIFC CFI 029 — Strike out of the Meraab Claim (26 October 2020)
The DIFC Court of First Instance strikes out a reformulated employment claim, emphasizing the necessity of strict compliance with court-ordered pleading limitations and the requirement to prove actual loss in parent-subsidiary corporate structures.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2020] DIFC CFI 029 — Strike out of defective pleadings (27 May 2020)
Justice Sir Richard Field orders the strike out of a poorly drafted credit-related claim, mandating that future pleadings must be free-standing and devoid of improper document annexation.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2020] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural extension of time for amended pleadings (18 March 2020)
The litigation between The Industrial Group and Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid involves a substantive dispute that necessitated the filing of an amended Counterclaim. The core of this procedural application centered on the Defendant/Counterclaimant’s request to adjust the deadlines previously…
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2019] DIFC CFI 029 — Dismissal of third-party disclosure application and assessment of costs (11 December 2019)
The Industrial Group, acting as the Claimant and Defendant by Counterclaim, initiated a formal application on 24 September 2019 seeking an order for third-party disclosure. The application was directed at a series of financial institutions, including The Saudi British Bank, HSBC Bank, Abu Dhabi…
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2019] DIFC CFI 029 — Judicial Officer order for removal of legal representation (04 November 2019)
The dispute in CFI 029/2018 involves The Industrial Group as the Claimant and Defendant by Counterclaim, and Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid as the Defendant and Claimant by Counterclaim.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2019] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural adjournment of third-party disclosure application (22 October 2019)
This order details the procedural management of a pending third-party disclosure application, vacating existing timetabling directions to allow for the review of witness evidence before further judicial intervention.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2019] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural extension for document production (24 September 2019)
A brief procedural order granting a time extension for document disclosure applications under the DIFC Rules of Court.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2019] DIFC CFI 029 — Case Management Order (05 September 2019)
This order establishes the procedural roadmap for the resolution of complex commercial disputes between The Industrial Group and Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid, mandating rigorous disclosure and expert forensic scrutiny ahead of a February 2020 trial.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2019] DIFC CFI 029 — Compelling disclosure via Redfern Schedule (16 July 2019)
This order clarifies the procedural mechanism for enforcing document production and witness statement requirements under the DIFC Rules of Court following a contested Redfern Schedule review.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2019] DIFC CFI 029 — Judicial Officer rejects procedural extension for pleadings (16 April 2019)
A strict application of case management timelines in the DIFC Court of First Instance, resulting in the refusal of a late-stage request to amend pleadings.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2019] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural extension of time for pleadings (28 March 2019)
The dispute between The Industrial Group and Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid involves ongoing litigation under case number CFI 029/2018. The specific matter at hand concerns the procedural timeline for the exchange of pleadings following the submission of an amended Counterclaim by the Defendant.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2019] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural directions for amended pleadings (31 January 2019)
The Industrial Group Ltd initiated this action against Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid, seeking to clarify the parameters of its legal pursuit. During the Case Management Conference, the Claimant requested leave to narrow the scope of its pleadings significantly.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2019] DIFC CFI 029 — Refusal of permission to appeal default judgment (16 January 2019)
This order clarifies the threshold for challenging default judgments in the DIFC Courts, specifically addressing the interplay between procedural irregularities in default requests and the substantive requirements for a valid set-off counterclaim.
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2018] DIFC CFI 029 — Default judgment set-aside and stay of execution (25 October 2018)
The dispute arose from a default judgment entered against the Defendant, Mr. Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid, in the amount of AED 1,376,000. The Claimant, The Industrial Group Ltd, sought recovery of these funds, alleging that the payments made to the Defendant lacked proper justification or…
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP v ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID [2018] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural consolidation and case management (14 August 2018)
The dispute centers on the management of two separate but related proceedings initiated by The Industrial Group against Abdelazim El Shikh El Fadil Hamid. Given the commonality of the parties and the subject matter, the Court determined that efficiency necessitated the merger of these files.
DAOUD THEODORE YOUSSEF v NOW HEALTH INTERNATIONAL [2018] DIFC CFI 029 — Consent stay of proceedings (24 June 2018)
The litigation involved a claim brought by Daoud Theodore Youssef against two corporate entities: Now Health International Limited and Now Health International (Investments) Limited.
DAOUD THEODORE YOUSSEF v NOW HEALTH INTERNATIONAL [2018] DIFC CFI 029 — Judicial Officer refusal to vary procedural orders (18 March 2018)
The dispute between Daoud Theodore Youssef and the two respondent entities, Now Health International Limited and Now Health International (Investments) Limited, centers on the claimant's attempt to alter the court's procedural trajectory.
DAOUD THEODORE YOUSSEF v NOW HEALTH INTERNATIONAL [2018] DIFC CFI 029 — Order for document production (22 February 2018)
This procedural order clarifies the threshold for document production under RDC Part 28, emphasizing the necessity of demonstrating relevance and materiality in Redfern Schedule requests.
DAOUD THEODORE YOUSSEF v NOW HEALTH INTERNATIONAL [2018] DIFC CFI 029 — Procedural amendment and cost allocation (08 January 2018)
This order clarifies the procedural requirements and cost consequences for a claimant seeking to amend pleadings under the Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC) after the initial filing of a defence.
DAOUD THEODORE YOUSSEF v NOW HEALTH INTERNATIONAL [2017] DIFC CFI 029 — Case management and procedural directions (08 October 2017)
The lawsuit involves a claim brought by Daoud Theodore Youssef against Now Health International Limited and Now Health International (Investments) Limited. While the underlying merits of the claim are not fully detailed in this procedural order, the court’s directions confirm that the core of the…
MR. NANDLAL KALWANI v MR. SASHA SHAIKH [2014] DIFC CFI 029 — Default judgment for AED 810,213.00 (13 May 2015)
The lawsuit concerns a claim for a specified sum of money totaling AED 810,213.00. The Claimant, Mr. Nandlal Kalwani, sought recovery of this amount from the two named Defendants, Mr. Sasha Shaikh and Mr. Sunil Ishwar Parmani.
NANDLAL KALWANI v SASHA SHAIKH [2015] DIFC CFI 029 — Extension of time for service of process (08 January 2015)
The dispute concerns the procedural lifecycle of the claim initiated by Nandlal Kalwani against Sasha Shaikh and Sunil Ishwar Parmani. At the heart of the matter was the Claimant’s failure to effect service of the Claim Form and Particulars of Claim within the mandatory four-month window prescribed…