EMIRATES NBD BANK PJSC v RASHED ABDULAZIZ ALMAKHAWI & Anor.

EMIRATES NBD BANK PJSC v RASHED ABDULAZIZ ALMAKHAWI & Anor.

The Dubai judgment is enforceable in England and Wales as the proceedings did not breach natural justice; the mistaken reference to outdated Dubai law in expert reports was not a substantive procedural defect and could have been remedied in Dubai. The transfer of the Warren House Property and the Money Transfers were transactions at an undervalue made, at least in part, for the purpose of putting assets beyond the reach of creditors, satisfying section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986. The presumption of advancement was not rebutted for the gifts, but the statutory test under section 423 was met.

Parties
Claimant: Emirates NBD Bank PJSC; First Defendant: Rashed Abdulaziz Almakhawi; Second Defendant: Abdulaziz Rashed Abdulaziz Mohammed Almakhawi
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial Enforcement and Asset Recovery / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Transactions Defrauding Creditors, Resulting Trusts, Presumption of Advancement
Commercial Law Conflict of Laws Insolvency Law Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Transactions Defrauding Creditors Resulting Trusts Presumption of Advancement

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Emirates NBD Bank PJSC

Claimant

Rashed Abdulaziz Almakhawi

First Defendant

Abdulaziz Rashed Abdulaziz Mohammed Almakhawi

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Enforcement and Asset Recovery / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Dubai judgment is enforceable in England and Wales under common law principles
  2. 2 Whether the transfer of property and money by the First Defendant to the Second Defendant was a transaction defrauding creditors under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986
  3. 3 Whether the presumption of advancement or resulting trust applies to the transfers

Ratio Decidendi

The Dubai judgment is enforceable in England and Wales as the proceedings did not breach natural justice; the mistaken reference to outdated Dubai law in expert reports was not a substantive procedural defect and could have been remedied in Dubai. The transfer of the Warren House Property and the Money Transfers were transactions at an undervalue made, at least in part, for the purpose of putting assets beyond the reach of creditors, satisfying section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986. The presumption of advancement was not rebutted for the gifts, but the statutory test under section 423 was met.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant

Orders

  • Declaration that the Dubai judgment is enforceable in England and Wales and monetary judgment entered against the First Defendant accordingly
  • Order under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 setting aside the transfers of the Warren House Property and the Money Transfers as transactions defrauding creditors; consequential orders to be determined