LITT
Try LITT free
GFH CAPITAL v DAVID LAWRENCE HAIGH [2016] DIFC CA 002 — Registrar strikes out appeal for failure to file skeleton argument (08 September 2016)
The dispute originated from the substantive proceedings in CFI 020/2014, where GFH Capital Limited sought legal recourse against David Lawrence Haigh. By the time the matter reached the Court of Appeal under reference CA 002/2016, the focus had shifted from the merits of the original claim to the…
GFH CAPITAL v DAVID LAWRENCE HAIGH [2016] DIFC CA 002 — Pro Bono funding and procedural management of multiple appeals (09 August 2016)
The dispute centers on the ongoing litigation between GFH Capital Limited and David Lawrence Haigh, which has involved complex freezing orders and multiple applications for relief. Following the Appellant’s request for an adjournment and financial assistance, the Court treated the application as a…
MR RAFED ABDEL MOHSEN BADER AL KHORAFI v BANK SARASIN ALPEN [2018] DIFC CFI 014 — Abuse of process and time-bar in banking litigation (18 April 2018)
The lawsuit centers on a claim for deceit arising from a 2007 margin call, which the Claimants allege was misrepresented by the Defendants. This followed extensive prior litigation (CFI 026/2009) concerning the mis-selling of financial products, specifically "the Notes," which resulted in a USD 35…
SHAHAB HAIDER v ERNST & YOUNG MIDDLE EAST [2013] DIFC CA 004 — Strict enforcement of cost assessment deadlines (16 April 2013)
The dispute arose from the assessment of costs following earlier litigation involving Shahab Haider, the liquidator of Orion Holdings Overseas Limited, and Ernst & Young Middle East.
SHAHAB HAIDER v ERNST & YOUNG DUBAI [2013] DIFC CA 004/2011 — Registrar grants extension of time for costs assessment (28 February 2013)
This order clarifies the procedural requirements for extending deadlines in the assessment of a Bill of Costs within the DIFC Courts, emphasizing the Registrar's role in formalizing consensual variations to RDC timelines.
SHAHAB HAIDER v ERNST & YOUNG MIDDLE EAST [2012] DIFC CA 004 — Awarding costs in insolvency-related appellate proceedings (30 April 2012)
The DIFC Court of Appeal formalizes the allocation of legal costs following the resolution of procedural disputes between the liquidator of Diwan Capital and Orion Holding Overseas and the respondent firm, Ernst & Young Middle East.
SHAHAB HAIDER v ERNST & YOUNG MIDDLE EAST [2012] DIFC CA 013 — Compelling document production in insolvency proceedings (24 January 2012)
The dispute centered on the Liquidator’s efforts to secure comprehensive access to the financial and operational records of Diwan Capital Limited, which were held by Ernst & Young Middle East (E&Y).
SHAHAB HAIDER v ERNST & YOUNG MIDDLE EAST [2012] DIFC CA 004 — Compelling document production in insolvency proceedings (22 January 2012)
The dispute centered on the Liquidator’s efforts to gain comprehensive access to the financial records and audit trail of Diwan Capital Limited, which was undergoing liquidation. Shahab Haider, acting in his capacity as the court-appointed Liquidator, initiated the application to ensure that all…
MONTE-CARLO STARS RESTAURANT v THE EMIRATES CAPITAL [2010] DIFC CA 005 — Finality of appellate dismissal (29 December 2010)
The litigation involved Monte-Carlo Stars Restaurant, a sole proprietorship, and its proprietor, Lionel Jean-Francois Henry, acting as Appellants against The Emirates Capital Limited.
MONTE-CARLO STARS RESTAURANT v THE EMIRATES CAPITAL [2010] DIFC CA 005 — Clarifying appellate filing timelines (14 December 2010)
The dispute centers on the procedural legitimacy of an appeal brought by Monte-Carlo Stars Restaurant and its sole proprietor, Lionel Jean-Francois Henry, against The Emirates Capital Limited. Following an order issued by H.E.
MONTE-CARLO STARS RESTAURANT v THE EMIRATES CAPITAL [2010] DIFC CA 005 — Procedural dismissal of appeal due to time-bar (09 December 2010)
The underlying dispute in CFI 005/2010 involved Monte-Carlo Stars Restaurant (a sole proprietorship also known as Monte-Carlo Stars Group) and its sole proprietor, Lionel Jean-Francois Henry, acting as the Appellants against the Respondent, The Emirates Capital Limited.
DAS REAL ESTATE v FIRST ABU DHABI BANK [2017] DIFC CA 002 — Permission to appeal granted (07 November 2017)
The underlying litigation, registered as CFI 002/2016, involves a complex dispute between Das Real Estate, represented by Mussabeh Salem Mussabeh Humaid Almuhairi, and First Abu Dhabi Bank.
Lachesis v Lacrosse [2021] DIFC CA 005 — Arbitration award enforcement and procedural technicalities (29 December 2021)
The Court of Appeal clarifies the limits of judicial intervention in international arbitration, affirming that procedural irregularities—such as the failure to sign every page of an award—do not necessitate setting aside an award absent demonstrable prejudice.
AHMED MOHAMED EID AL YAHAD AL ZAABI v AL BUHAIRA NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY [2026] DIFC TCD 002 — Assessment of costs following unsuccessful appeal application (31 March 2026)
The dispute originated from a Part 7 claim filed by Ahmed Mohamed Eid Al Yahad Al Zaabi against Al Buhaira National Insurance Company. Following the dismissal of the Claimant’s action and the subsequent refusal of permission to appeal, the Defendant sought to recover its legal costs.
HUOBI OTC DMCC v TABARAK INVESTMENT CAPITAL [2021] DIFC TCD 001 — Procedural adjustment to document production timelines (08 July 2021)
The litigation, registered under TCD 001/2020, involves the Claimant, Huobi OTC DMCC, and two Defendants: Tabarak Investment Capital Limited and Mr. Christian Thurner. The dispute centers on complex commercial and technological claims that have necessitated rigorous case management within the…
NEST INVESTMENTS HOLDING LEBANON v DELOITTE & TOUCHE [2020] DIFC TCD 003 — Preliminary issues on auditor liability and limitation (13 June 2021)
The litigation arises from the collapse of the Lebanese Canadian Bank (LCB) following a 2011 notice from the US Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), which identified LCB as a "financial institution of primary money laundering concern." The Claimants, a group of shareholders including Nest…
FIVE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT v REEM EMIRATES ALUMINIUM [2023] DIFC TCD 009 — Final assessment of construction litigation costs (30 August 2023)
The dispute between Five Real Estate Development and Reem Emirates Aluminium originated from complex construction litigation within the Technology and Construction Division. Following the resolution of the substantive claims, the court moved to the assessment of costs, a process initiated by the…
FIVE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT v REEM EMIRATES ALUMINIUM [2023] DIFC TCD 009 — Post-judgment final account determination (26 May 2023)
This order finalizes the financial reconciliation between the parties following the court’s March 2023 judgment, rejecting late-stage attempts to reopen evidence regarding the Final Account.
FIVE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT v REEM EMIRATES ALUMINIUM [2023] DIFC TCD 009 — Construction dispute over prolongation costs and indemnity claims (03 March 2023)
This judgment resolves a complex construction dispute concerning the FIVE JVC Hotel, focusing on the allocation of delay liability, the recovery of prolongation costs, and the legal enforceability of indemnity claims under UAE law.
FIVE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT v REEM EMIRATES ALUMINIUM [2022] DIFC TCD 009 — Consent order for expert evidence management (13 May 2022)
The lawsuit concerns a complex construction dispute between Five Real Estate Development LLC (the Claimant) and Reem Emirates Aluminium LLC (the Defendant). The litigation has involved multiple interlocutory stages, including previous orders regarding counterclaims and strike-out applications, such…
FIVE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT v REEM EMIRATES ALUMINIUM [2022] DIFC TCD 009 — Security for costs and payment on account (14 April 2022)
The dispute between Five Real Estate Development and Reem Emirates Aluminium concerns a complex construction project, which has generated significant litigation within the DIFC Courts’ Technology and Construction Division.
FIVE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT v REEM EMIRATES ALUMINIUM [2022] DIFC TCD 009 — Dismissal of urgent application for Unless Order (22 March 2022)
The lawsuit concerns a complex construction dispute between Five Real Estate Development (the Claimant) and Reem Emirates Aluminium (the Defendant). The litigation has been characterized by numerous interlocutory skirmishes, as evidenced by the history of the case, including: [FIVE REAL ESTATE…
FIVE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT v REEM EMIRATES ALUMINIUM [2022] DIFC TCD 009 — Disclosure Order regarding Redfern Schedule production (23 February 2022)
The litigation concerns a complex construction dispute between Five Real Estate Development (the Claimant) and Reem Emirates Aluminium (the Defendant). The parties have been locked in a series of procedural battles, including earlier disputes regarding counterclaims and FIDIC-based claims, as seen…
Ginette v Geary [2015] DIFC ARB 012: The Doctrine of Apparent Authority in Arbitral Enforcement
How the DIFC Courts solidified the enforceability of arbitration agreements signed by agents lacking express authority. On 7 April 2016, H.E.