LITT
Try LITT free
LABACA v LANDI [2021] DIFC SCT 121 — Tenancy dispute over maintenance and early lease termination (02 June 2021)
The Small Claims Tribunal clarifies the evidentiary threshold for tenants seeking early lease termination due to alleged maintenance failures under the DIFC Leasing Law.
Nalani v Narciso [2024] DIFC SCT 120 — Employment entitlement dispute regarding visa sponsorship status (17 May 2024)
The dispute centered on the Claimant’s request for unpaid salary, notice period pay, and accrued vacation leave following his termination on 11 March 2024. The Claimant, Nalani, sought a total of AED 18,125, comprising one month’s salary (AED 7,250), one month’s notice pay (AED 7,250), and 15 days…
Orabelle v Orzenia [2026] DIFC ARB 007: The Jurisdictional Threshold for Worldwide Freezing Orders
H.E. Justice Shamlan Al Sawalehi clarifies that the DIFC Courts’ remedial powers cannot bypass the statutory requirement for a nexus within the jurisdiction. On January 30, 2026, H.E.
Lyric v Lucian [2022] DIFC SCT 120 — enforcement of early termination penalties in residential leasing (27 May 2022)
The dispute centered on a claim for damages arising from the premature cancellation of a residential lease for an apartment in the DIFC. The Claimant, Lyric, sought a total of AED 23,500 from the Defendant, Lucian, following the Defendant's decision to terminate the tenancy before the agreed-upon…
LIBBY v LEON [2021] DIFC SCT 120 — Strict adherence to SCT procedural timelines for setting aside default orders (15 June 2021)
The Small Claims Tribunal clarifies the mandatory nature of the seven-day limitation period for setting aside default orders and the dual-burden test required for successful applications.
IARA & COMPANY v IBEN INDUSTRIES [2018] DIFC SCT 120 — Enforceability of email-approved legal fee invoices (13 June 2018)
The Small Claims Tribunal affirms that email-based fee approvals constitute binding contractual obligations, rejecting attempts to disavow debt based on internal personnel changes.
Haneul v Hege LLP [2017] DIFC SCT 120 — Employment gratuity and fiduciary breach (28 August 2017)
The Small Claims Tribunal clarifies the interplay between resignation, notice period obligations, and the forfeiture of end-of-service gratuity under the DIFC Employment Law.
GIICHI LLC v GLENYS [2016] SCT 120 — Reimbursement of erroneously transferred franchise funds (04 October 2016)
The dispute arose from a failed franchise arrangement between Giichi LLC, a franchise company, and Glenys, a Saudi national. Following the execution of a Franchise Agreement on 31 January 2016, the parties encountered difficulties in securing a suitable location, leading to the eventual termination…
Idus v Iessica Ltd [2018] DIFC SCT 119 — Implied contract extension and notice period entitlements (13 May 2018)
The Small Claims Tribunal clarifies that conduct can impliedly extend an expired employment contract under DIFC law, while confirming that the DIFC Employment Law does not recognize the limited/unlimited contract distinction common in onshore UAE labor regulations.
FLAVIUS v FLEUR HOLDING [2015] DIFC SCT 119 — Refund of share subscription funds (25 August 2015)
The dispute centered on a failed investment transaction initiated in July 2014. Flavius sought a full refund of funds transferred to Fleur Holding under the premise of becoming a shareholder.
HEDDA LEGAL CONSULTANCY v HECTA SERVICES [2017] DIFC SCT 118 — Jurisdiction over unpaid legal fees for DIFC Court representation (11 June 2017)
The dispute in *Hedda Legal Consultancy (Dubai Branch) v Hecta Services* [2017] DIFC SCT 118 centered on a claim for AED 76,400.00 in unpaid legal fees. The Claimant, Hedda Legal Consultancy, sought recovery of these fees for services rendered while acting as the Defendant’s legal representative in…
Mokhit v Maru [2023] DIFC SCT 117 — Breach of recruitment service agreement (27 April 2023)
The dispute arose from a permanent recruitment service agreement signed by the parties on 16 November 2020. The Claimant, Mokhit, alleged that it had successfully introduced a candidate for the role of Chief Technology Officer to the Defendant, Maru, in August 2022.
Maalik Investments v Mabili Interior Decoration Design [2022] DIFC SCT 117 — Breach of contract in office fit-out disputes (26 May 2022)
The dispute centered on the failure of the First Defendant, Mabili Interior Decoration Design, and the Second Defendant, Mr. Macair, to execute a commercial office fit-out project for the Claimant, Maalik Investments.
Luciane v Leon [2020] DIFC SCT 117 — Unpaid service charges and the recoverability of SCT representation fees (28 May 2020)
The dispute centers on a claim for unpaid service charges and associated penalties brought by Luciane, a housing management company, against Leon, the owner of a residential unit within the DIFC.
Flavia v The Fletch Group [2015] DIFC SCT 117 — Enforcement of Settlement and Release Agreements (24 August 2015)
The dispute arose when the Claimant, Flavia, sought additional end-of-service benefits and penalties for late payment from her former employer, The Fletch Group. Flavia contended that her leave entitlement had been miscalculated, arguing that the valuation should have been based on her daily wage…
JAMARU GROUP HOLDING v JASMINE [2019] DIFC SCT 116 — Piercing the corporate veil in employment disputes (26 June 2019)
The Claimant, Jamaru Group Holding, initiated proceedings against its former employee, Jasmine, seeking the reimbursement of AED 105,000. The company alleged that this sum, paid to the Defendant on 26 April 2018, constituted an advance on housing allowance and other employment-related benefits.
NEVA v NATALIE [2024] DIFC SCT 115 — Enforceability of fixed-fee legal service agreements (14 June 2024)
The DIFC Small Claims Tribunal confirms that law firms are entitled to retain fees under a fixed-rate engagement agreement where contractual obligations have been performed, notwithstanding a client's unilateral withdrawal due to escalating costs.
LENTINA v LINT [2021] DIFC SCT 115 — Contractual termination and third-party liability in marketing services (14 June 2021)
The Small Claims Tribunal clarifies the application of "no-cause" termination clauses and the limits of vicarious liability for third-party entities in a cross-border marketing services dispute.
Ifrah v Ibhan [2018] DIFC SCT 113 — Employment salary dispute and loan set-off (24 April 2018)
The dispute centered on the termination of the Claimant, Ifrah, by the Defendant, Ibhan LLC, on 30 October 2017. The Claimant initiated proceedings in the Small Claims Tribunal (SCT) seeking her final month’s salary, statutory penalties for late payment, and the return of personal property and visa…
HEDWIG PROPERTIES v HAYNES [2017] DIFC SCT 113 — Agency fee recovery following tenant circumvention (21 June 2017)
The dispute centered on an AED 8,000 agency fee, representing 5% of the annual rent for a unit in the DIFC. The Claimant, Hedwig Properties, alleged that it had performed all necessary services to secure the lease for the First Defendant, Haynes, including arranging viewings, negotiating the rent,…
NAIMA v NADINE [2024] DIFC SCT 112 — Enforceability of digital membership commitments (13 May 2024)
The dispute centered on an outstanding balance for a professional networking membership provided by the Claimant, Naima. The Claimant alleged that the Defendant, Nadine, entered into a binding one-year membership agreement starting in September 2023, which offered the flexibility of either an…
JAAL BANK v JASA [2019] DIFC SCT 112 — Personal liability for corporate-funded loans (19 June 2019)
The Claimant, Jaal Bank (PJSC), initiated proceedings against the Defendant, Jasa, to recover funds arising from a personal finance agreement. The dispute centered on the Defendant’s failure to maintain repayment installments following a 2018 loan restructuring.
Nelson v Nicolyne [2024] DIFC SCT 111 — Refusal of permission to appeal in property management fee dispute (05 August 2024)
The dispute originated from a property management arrangement concerning an apartment owned by Ms Nicolyne. The Claimant, Nelson, sought to recover a fee of AED 15,000, asserting that he had successfully performed services related to the management and lease renewal of the property.
Nelson v Nicolyne [2024] DIFC SCT 111 — Property management service fee dispute (15 July 2024)
The Small Claims Tribunal clarifies the scope of agent authority, ruling that property managers cannot unilaterally bind owners to tenancy terms without explicit approval of material financial conditions.