LITT
Try LITT free
FURSA CONSULTING v AJAY SETHI [2023] DIFC CFI 056 — Costs assessment following dismissal of AED 966,000 claim (31 October 2023)
The DIFC Court of First Instance reaffirms the high threshold for indemnity costs, rejecting a defendant's bid for enhanced recovery while upholding the standard 'costs follow the event' principle despite the claimant's plea of financial hardship.
FURSA CONSULTING v AJAY SETHI [2023] DIFC CFI 056 — Contractual interpretation of success fee triggers (05 October 2023)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the threshold for "successful transactions" in financial advisory mandates, ruling that a success fee is not triggered by the mere signing of a conditional facility letter absent the actual sanctioning of credit.
FURSA CONSULTING v AJAY SETHI SHAKTI CHAND SETHI [2022] DIFC CFI 056 — Procedural transition to Part 7 claim (27 September 2022)
The dispute centers on an application filed by the Claimant, Fursa Consulting, on 21 September 2022, concerning the procedural posture of its claim against the Defendant, Ajay Sethi Shakti Chand Sethi.
TARIG MOHAMED ABDELSALAM ABDELRAHMAN v EXEPRESSO TELECOM GROUP [2022] DIFC CFI 056 — Amended order for escrow release (24 March 2022)
The dispute originated from a claim filed under CFI 056/2021, involving Tarig Mohamed Abdelsalam Abdelrahman and Exepresso Telecom Group. The litigation reached a critical juncture when Justice Sir Jeremy Cooke issued an order on 5 December 2021, mandating that the Defendant pay the sum of USD…
TARIG MOHAMED ABDELSALAM ABDELRAHMAN v EXEPRESSO TELECOM GROUP [2022] DIFC CFI 056 — Registrar’s order for release of settlement funds (10 March 2022)
This order formalizes the distribution of settlement funds held in the DIFC Courts’ Escrow Account following a mediated resolution between the parties.
TARIG MOHAMED ABDELSALAM ABDELRAHMAN v EXEPRESSO TELECOM GROUP [2022] DIFC CFI 056 — Costs reservation in interlocutory proceedings (26 January 2022)
Justice Sir Jeremy Cooke’s order underscores the DIFC Court’s judicial preference for reserving costs in interlocutory applications where the final liability remains contingent on the ultimate resolution of the underlying dispute.
TARIG MOHAMED ABDELSALAM ABDELRAHMAN v EXEPRESSO TELECOM GROUP [2022] DIFC CFI 056 — Procedural management of escrow funds and amended pleadings (04 January 2022)
Justice Sir Jeremy Cooke clarifies the restrictive purpose of funds paid into court on admissions and establishes a strict procedural timeline for resolving contested amendments to pleadings in an employment dispute.
TARIG MOHAMED ABDELSALAM ABDELRAHMAN v EXPRESSO TELECOM GROUP [2021] DIFC CFI 056 — Default Judgment set aside (05 December 2021)
The dispute arose from the termination of an employment contract entered into on 1 August 2019, under which the Claimant served as the managing director of the Defendant’s subsidiary in Mauritania.
TARIG MOHAMED ABDELSALAM ABDELRAHMAN v EXEPRESSO TELECOM GROUP [2021] DIFC CFI 056 — Refusal of late-stage evidence submission (14 November 2021)
The dispute centers on the Claimant’s attempt to introduce additional evidence in the form of comments regarding the Defendant’s Third Witness Statement. Following the filing of that statement by Exepresso Telecom Group on 19 October 2021, the Claimant sought formal permission from the Court to…
TARIG MOHAMED ABDELSALAM ABDELRAHMAN v EXEPRESSO TELECOM GROUP [2021] DIFC CFI 056 — Default judgment for USD 447,700 (01 September 2021)
The DIFC Court of First Instance confirms the procedural requirements for obtaining a default judgment where a defendant fails to acknowledge service or file a defence within the prescribed timeframe.
PINE INVESTMENTS v NMC HEALTH PLC [2020] DIFC CFI 056 — Interim stay of proceedings pending ADGM administration (24 November 2020)
The litigation involves a claim brought by Pine Investments, Dr Michael Hasan Fakih, and Dr Amal Moawiya Alshunnar against two primary respondents: NMC Health PLC, incorporated in England and Wales, and NMC Healthcare LLC, a Dubai-incorporated entity.
BANQUE CANTONALE DE GENEVE v SEYED ABBASALI MARASHI [2018] DIFC CFI 056 — Default judgment for USD 11.9 million (15 March 2018)
The litigation arose from a substantial financial claim brought by Banque Cantonale De Geneve against Seyed Abbasali Marashi. The claimant sought recovery of a specified sum of money, which ultimately formed the basis of the court’s order for the defendant to satisfy the debt.
GANESAN MUTHIAH v ABDUL RAHMAN MOHAMMAD [2026] DIFC CFI 055 — Renewed application for permission to appeal against the vacation of costs orders (26 March 2026)
The litigation between Ganesan Muthiah and Abdul Rahman Mohammad concerns the dissolution and liquidation of Gulf IT Network Distribution – Freezone – LLC, a telecommunications and internet services provider based in Dubai International City.
GANESAN MUTHIAH v ABDUL RAHMAN MOHAMMAD [2026] DIFC CFI 055 — Costs assessment following dismissed PTA application (29 January 2026)
The DIFC Court of First Instance clarifies the application of proportionality in cost recovery following the dismissal of a Permission to Appeal application, resulting in an 80% award of claimed professional fees.
GANESAN MUTHIAH v ABDUL RAHMAN MOHAMMAD [2026] DIFC CFI 055 — The finality of CJT decisions and the cessation of DIFC jurisdiction (21 January 2026)
This order confirms that a decision by the Conflict of Jurisdiction Tribunal (CJT) acts as an absolute bar to further proceedings in the DIFC Courts, including the enforcement of previously awarded costs.
GANESAN MUTHIAH v ABDUL RAHMAN MOHAMMAD [2026] DIFC CFI 055 — jurisdictional dismissal and the nullification of prior costs orders (13 January 2026)
The DIFC Court clarifies that when the Conflict of Jurisdiction Tribunal (CJT) mandates a transfer of proceedings to the Dubai Courts, prior costs orders predicated on the Court’s assumed jurisdiction must be set aside.
Ganesan Muthiah v Abdul Rahman Mohammad [2025] DIFC CFI 055 — jurisdiction and service failures lead to strike-out and heavy costs (10 September 2025)
The DIFC Court of First Instance confirms that private jurisdiction clauses in Articles of Association cannot override statutory jurisdictional gateways, resulting in the dismissal of a million-dirham claim and a significant adverse costs order.
LOMBARD NORTH CENTRAL PLC v R D K INTERNATIONAL [2022] DIFC CFI 055 — Default judgment for a multi-million pound debt (11 October 2022)
The litigation concerned a claim for a specified sum of money brought by the Claimant, Lombard North Central PLC, against the Defendant, R D K International LLC. The dispute arose from the Defendant’s failure to satisfy an outstanding financial obligation, leading the Claimant to initiate…
LOMBARD NORTH CENTRAL PLC v R D K INTERNATIONAL [2022] DIFC CFI 055 — Procedural conversion of claim (20 September 2022)
The dispute between Lombard North Central PLC and R D K International LLC originated as a Part 8 claim, which is typically reserved for matters where there is no substantial dispute of fact or where the court’s intervention is sought for specific, narrow relief.
LOMBARD NORTH CENTRAL PLC v R D K INTERNATIONAL [2022] DIFC CFI 055 — Procedural transition from Part 8 to Part 7 (14 September 2022)
The dispute between Lombard North Central PLC and R D K International LLC originated as a Part 8 claim, which is typically reserved for matters where there is no substantial dispute of fact or where the court is asked to determine a specific point of law.
SOL INTERNATIONAL PROPERTIES v RAVIOLI & CO TRADITIONAL ITALIAN PASTIFICIO [2022] DIFC CFI 055 — Consent order for discontinuance (07 July 2022)
The litigation involved a claim brought by Sol International Properties Limited against two respondents: Ravioli & Co Traditional Italian Pastificio Ltd, which was identified as being in liquidation, and an individual, Shahab Haider.
SOL INTERNATIONAL PROPERTIES v RAVIOLI & CO TRADITIONAL ITALIAN PASTIFICIO [2022] DIFC CFI 055 — Procedural management of claims involving entities in liquidation (18 March 2022)
A procedural consent order issued by the DIFC Registrar to manage the litigation timeline for a claim involving a defendant currently undergoing liquidation proceedings.
SOL INTERNATIONAL PROPERTIES v RAVIOLI & CO TRADITIONAL ITALIAN PASTIFICIO [2022] DIFC CFI 055 — Procedural pause in insolvency-related litigation (21 February 2022)
A procedural consent order formalizing the stay of proceedings in a dispute involving a defendant company undergoing liquidation.
SOL INTERNATIONAL PROPERTIES v RAVIOLI & CO TRADITIONAL ITALIAN PASTIFICIO [2022] DIFC CFI 055 — Procedural stay in insolvency proceedings (13 January 2022)
The litigation involves a claim brought by SOL International Properties against Ravioli & Co Traditional Italian Pastificio, a company currently undergoing liquidation. While the specific underlying commercial grievance remains subject to ongoing filings, the case highlights the complexities…