(1) Hormuzd Mana (2) Shireen Mana v Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd [2011] DIFC CFI 030 (29 August 2013)

(1) Hormuzd Mana (2) Shireen Mana v Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd [2011] DIFC CFI 030 (29 August 2013)

The Registrar lacked power to make the Unless Order, but the mandatory direction to commence detailed assessment proceedings remained valid. The Appellants failed to comply with procedural requirements by serving unsigned documents and provided no acceptable explanation for non-compliance. Relief from sanctions and extension of time to appeal were refused due to repeated disregard for timelines and rules. The appeals against all three orders were dismissed.

Citation
[2011] DIFC CFI 030
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Hormuzd Mana; Claimant/appellant: Shireen Mana; Defendant/respondent: Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
29 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal in Detailed Assessment Proceedings / Judgment on Appeal From Registrar's Orders
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs Assessment, Sanctions for Procedural Non Compliance, Permission to Appeal, Breach of Contract, Negligence, Misrepresentation
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Costs Assessment Sanctions for Procedural Non Compliance Permission to Appeal Breach of Contract Negligence Misrepresentation

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hormuzd Mana

Claimant/appellant

Shireen Mana

Claimant/appellant

Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal in Detailed Assessment Proceedings / Judgment on Appeal From Registrar's Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Registrar had power to make an Unless Order as a sanction for delay in commencing detailed assessment proceedings
  2. 2 Whether unsigned notice of commencement and bill of costs constituted compliance with procedural requirements
  3. 3 Whether relief from sanctions should be granted for procedural non-compliance

Ratio Decidendi

The Registrar lacked power to make the Unless Order, but the mandatory direction to commence detailed assessment proceedings remained valid. The Appellants failed to comply with procedural requirements by serving unsigned documents and provided no acceptable explanation for non-compliance. Relief from sanctions and extension of time to appeal were refused due to repeated disregard for timelines and rules. The appeals against all three orders were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appellants' appeal against the first, second, and third orders is dismissed.
  • Appellants to pay Respondent's costs for the appeal dated 23 January 2013, Applications 03 and 05, and submissions concerning permission to appeal, to be assessed if not agreed.