Dar Al Arkan Real Estate Development Company & Anor v Al-Sayed Bader Hashim Al Refai & Ors

Dar Al Arkan Real Estate Development Company & Anor v Al-Sayed Bader Hashim Al Refai & Ors

The committal application should be heard before trial to uphold the court's authority and ensure procedural fairness, despite some overlap with trial issues. However, the judge must recuse himself from hearing the committal application due to detailed and adverse prior findings on credibility and facts central to the contempt application, creating a real possibility of apparent bias. Directions on the admissibility of the December 2012 judgment are premature and should be left to the judge hearing the committal application.

Parties
Claimant: Dar Al Arkan Real Estate Development Company; Claimant: Bank Alkhair BSC; Defendant: Majid Al-Sayed Bader Hashim Al Refai; Defendant: Kroll Associates UK Limited; Defendant: Alexander Richardson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Committal Application (civil Contempt) Within Commercial Litigation / Interlocutory Application—management of Committal Application, Recusal, and Admissibility Directions
Outcome
Application for early hearing of committal application granted; judge recuses himself from hearing the committal application; no directions given on admissibility of prior judgment.
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Case Management, Recusal of Judge, Admissibility of Prior Judgments
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Contempt of Court Committal for Contempt Case Management Recusal of Judge Admissibility of Prior Judgments

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 7 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dar Al Arkan Real Estate Development Company

Claimant

Bank Alkhair BSC

Claimant

Majid Al-Sayed Bader Hashim Al Refai

Defendant

Kroll Associates UK Limited

Defendant

Alexander Richardson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Committal Application (civil Contempt) Within Commercial Litigation / Interlocutory Application—management of Committal Application, Recusal, and Admissibility Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When should the committal application for contempt be heard—before or after trial?
  2. 2 Should the judge recuse himself from hearing the committal application due to apparent bias?
  3. 3 What use, if any, may be made of the judge's prior findings in the December 2012 judgment at the committal hearing?

Ratio Decidendi

The committal application should be heard before trial to uphold the court's authority and ensure procedural fairness, despite some overlap with trial issues. However, the judge must recuse himself from hearing the committal application due to detailed and adverse prior findings on credibility and facts central to the contempt application, creating a real possibility of apparent bias. Directions on the admissibility of the December 2012 judgment are premature and should be left to the judge hearing the committal application.

Court Disposition

Application for early hearing of committal application granted; judge recuses himself from hearing the committal application; no directions given on admissibility of prior judgment.

Orders

  • Committal application to be heard before trial by a different judge.
  • No directions on admissibility of December 2012 judgment; issue reserved for judge hearing the committal application.