LITT
Try LITT free
TECHNICAL ARCHITECTS GENERAL CONTRACTING COMPANY v NAKHEEL [2012] DIFC CFI 029 — Judicial review of Dubai World Tribunal decisions (20 December 2012)
The dispute arose from a construction contract between Technical Architects General Contracting Company LLC (the Claimant) and Nakheel PJSC (the Defendant). The Claimant had initially secured a default judgment from the DWT for AED 73,629,905.
TECHNICAL ARCHITECTS GENERAL CONTRACTING v NAKHEEL [2012] DIFC CFI 029 — Judicial review of Dubai World Tribunal decisions (24 September 2012)
The DIFC Court of First Instance addresses the procedural threshold for judicial review when the underlying subject matter involves the jurisdictional competence of the Dubai World Tribunal.
SHEREEN ALDISI v ORION HOLDING OVERSEAS [2011] DIFC CFI 029 — Final Costs Certificate and joint liability apportionment (11 May 2011)
The dispute centered on the allocation of legal costs owed by thirteen individual claimants to the six corporate defendants, collectively referred to as the Orion entities. Following the conclusion of the substantive proceedings, the defendants sought a Final Costs Certificate to recover their…
SHEREEN ALDISI v ORION HOLDING OVERSEAS [2011] DIFC CFI 029 — Final Default Costs Certificate enforcement (26 April 2011)
The dispute centered on the procedural failure of the Claimants—a group of thirteen individuals including Shereen Aldisi and Nour Saleem—to serve points of dispute regarding the Defendants' bill of costs.
SHEREEN ALDISI v ORION HOLDING OVERSEAS [2011] DIFC CFI 029 — Conditional grant of application pending payment of court fees (17 January 2011)
The Court of First Instance addresses the procedural necessity of settling outstanding court fees as a condition precedent to the granting of an application in the multi-party litigation of Shereen Aldisi and others against Orion Holding Overseas and its related entities.
SHEREEN ALDISI v ORION HOLDING OVERSEAS [2010] DIFC CFI 029 — Refusal of leave to appeal and extension of time (18 March 2010)
The DIFC Court of First Instance affirms the finality of procedural orders, emphasizing that party confusion and delays in securing legal representation do not constitute sufficient grounds for extending strict appellate timelines.
SHEREEN ALDISI v ORION HOLDING OVERSEAS [2010] DIFC CFI 029 — Refusal of leave to appeal and interim costs (08 February 2010)
The DIFC Court of First Instance reinforces the finality of interlocutory costs orders and the strict adherence to RDC appeal timelines, denying a collective attempt by thirteen claimants to overturn previous freezing order discharges.
SHEREEN ALDISI v ORION HOLDING OVERSEAS [2010] DIFC CFI 029 — Interim payment of costs order (28 January 2010)
The litigation in CFI 029/2009 involved a multi-party claim brought by Shereen Aldisi and twelve other individuals against a group of six corporate entities collectively referred to as the Orion group.
SHEREEN ALDISI v ORION HOLDING OVERSEAS [2009] DIFC CFI 029 — Discharge of freezing orders and imposition of procedural sanctions (17 November 2009)
The litigation involved a group of thirteen applicants, led by Shereen Aldisi, who sought urgent injunctive relief against a cluster of six corporate entities collectively referred to as the Orion group.
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2024] DIFC CFI 028 — Inadvertent disclosure and the threshold for removing documents from the eRegistry (25 September 2024)
The lawsuit involves a complex web of costs assessment proceedings following the discharge of a freezing order. The Defendants, including Commercial Bank of Dubai and several investment entities, sought to excise specific documents from the DIFC Court’s eRegistry.
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2024] DIFC CFI 028 — Consent order staying costs assessment pending external set-off litigation (12 July 2024)
The dispute centers on the enforcement of an Interim Costs Order originally issued by H.E. Justice Nassir Al Nasser on 18 September 2023. Following this order, the Defendants initiated detailed assessment proceedings in February 2024, which subsequently triggered a series of procedural filings,…
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2024] DIFC CFI 028 — procedural adjustment of cost assessment deadlines (15 May 2024)
The litigation, registered as CFI 028/2023, involves a complex multi-party dispute where the Defendants initiated detailed assessment proceedings following the underlying substantive matter.
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v HORTIN HOLDING [2024] DIFC CFI 028 — procedural management of detailed assessment proceedings (09 May 2024)
The litigation concerns the assessment of legal costs following the underlying proceedings in CFI 028/2023. The Defendants, comprising Hortin Holding Limited, Lodge Hill Limited, Westdene Investment Limited, and VS 1897 (Cayman) Limited, initiated detailed assessment proceedings on 16 February 2024…
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2024] DIFC CFI 028 — Procedural extension in detailed assessment proceedings (30 April 2024)
The litigation, registered under CFI 028/2023, has transitioned into the costs assessment phase following the substantive proceedings. The dispute currently centers on the quantification of legal costs recoverable by the Defendants, specifically following the service of a revised Bill of Costs on 1…
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v HORTIN HOLDING [2023] DIFC CFI 028 — Interim payment on account of costs (18 September 2023)
The litigation, registered under CFI 028/2023, involved a claim brought by Globe Investment Holdings Limited against four respondents: Hortin Holding Limited, Lodge Hill Limited, Westdene Investment Limited, and VS 1897 (Cayman) Limited.
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2023] DIFC CFI 028 — Enforcement of foreign judgment and the scope of the Enforcement Principle (04 July 2023)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the jurisdictional boundaries of the "Enforcement Principle" and the limits of corporate veil piercing when seeking to maintain a worldwide freezing order against foreign entities linked to a local DIFC establishment.
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2023] DIFC CFI 028 — Discharge of freezing order (19 June 2023)
The litigation concerns a complex multi-party dispute initiated by Globe Investment Holdings Limited against five respondents: Commercial Bank of Dubai, Hortin Holding Limited, Lodge Hill Limited, Westdene Investment Limited, and VS 1897 (Cayman) Limited.
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2023] DIFC CFI 028 — Procedural management of a freezing order return date (19 May 2023)
The court’s order of 19 May 2023 serves as a critical procedural milestone in the ongoing dispute between Globe Investment Holdings Limited and the five named Respondents, including Commercial Bank of Dubai.
GLOBE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS v COMMERCIAL BANK OF DUBAI [2023] DIFC CFI 028 — Worldwide Freezing Order against corporate respondents (03 May 2023)
The lawsuit involves a high-value commercial claim brought by Globe Investment Holdings Limited against five respondents, including the Commercial Bank of Dubai and four corporate entities: Hortin Holding Limited, Lodge Hill Limited, Westdene Investment Limited, and VS 1897 (Cayman) Limited.
MALEIK v MALHO [2022] DIFC CFI 028 — Enforceability of security deposit clauses in membership contracts (14 June 2022)
The dispute arose from a membership contract entered into on 27 December 2021, which granted the Appellant access to the Respondent’s fleet of pleasure boats for a monthly fee of AED 2,000.
FIVE HOLDING v QATAR INSURANCE COMPANY [2024] DIFC CFI 028 — Consent order on costs (25 April 2024)
The dispute involved a claim brought by Five Holding Limited and Five Hotel FZE against Qatar Insurance Company. Following the dismissal of the proceedings, the parties were tasked with determining the quantum of legal costs owed by the Claimants to the Defendant.
FIVE HOLDING v QATAR INSURANCE COMPANY [2024] DIFC CFI 028 — Consent order dismissing proceedings following JJC jurisdictional determination (28 March 2024)
The dispute originated from an insurance-related claim filed by Five Holding Limited and Five Hotel FZE against Qatar Insurance Company on 21 February 2021. The claimants sought relief through the DIFC Court of First Instance, eventually obtaining a default judgment on 14 March 2021.
FIVE HOLDING v QATAR INSURANCE COMPANY [2021] DIFC CFI 028 — Interim costs assessment following default judgment (13 September 2021)
The dispute arose following a successful application for default judgment by Five Holding Limited and Five Hotel FZE against Qatar Insurance Company. Having secured a judgment on 14 March 2021, the Claimants sought to recover their legal expenses incurred during the proceedings.
FIVE HOLDING v QATAR INSURANCE COMPANY [2021] DIFC CFI 028 — Registrar orders payment on account for costs (09 September 2021)
The dispute arose from the Claimants' unsuccessful attempt to lift a stay of proceedings previously ordered by H.E. Justice Omar Al Muhairi on 14 April 2021. Following the dismissal of this "Stay Application" by Justice Wayne Martin on 4 August 2021, the Defendant was awarded its costs.