Nelson v Nicolyne [2024] DIFC SCT 111 (05 August 2024)
The Judge found that the Claimant acted contrary to the agreement by agreeing a lower rent without authorisation, and therefore was not entitled to the fee. There is no prospect that this finding would be overturned on appeal.
- Citation
- [2024] DIFC SCT 111
- Parties
- Claimant/applicant: Nelson; Defendant/respondent: Nicolyne
- Jurisdiction
- United Arab Emirates
- Judgment Date
- 05 August 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal of Small Claims Tribunal Judgment / Application for Permission to Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for permission to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Breach of Contract, Entitlement to Fees, Permission to Appeal
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Nelson
Claimant/applicant
Nicolyne
Defendant/respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal of Small Claims Tribunal Judgment / Application for Permission to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Claimant is entitled to a fee for services rendered under the agreement
- 2 Whether permission to appeal should be granted
Ratio Decidendi
The Judge found that the Claimant acted contrary to the agreement by agreeing a lower rent without authorisation, and therefore was not entitled to the fee. There is no prospect that this finding would be overturned on appeal.
Court Disposition
Application for permission to appeal refused
Orders
- The Application is refused.
- Each party shall bear their own costs of the Application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment