SBM Bank (Mauritius) Ltd v Renish Petrochem FZE (2) Mr Hiteshkumar Chinubhai Mehta [2023] DIFC CA 011 (06 February 2023)

SBM Bank (Mauritius) Ltd v Renish Petrochem FZE (2) Mr Hiteshkumar Chinubhai Mehta [2023] DIFC CA 011 (06 February 2023)

Extension of time is granted as the Respondent’s ability to file required documents is contingent on Appellants’ payment of security for costs, and no prejudice is caused to the Appellants.

Citation
[2023] DIFC CA 011
Parties
Claimant/respondent: SBM Bank (Mauritius) Ltd; Defendant/appellant: Renish Petrochem FZE; Defendant/appellant: Mr Hiteshkumar Chinubhai Mehta
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
06 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Order on Extension of Time
Outcome
Extension of time granted
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure, Security for Costs
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeal Procedure Security for Costs

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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SBM Bank (Mauritius) Ltd

Claimant/respondent

Renish Petrochem FZE

Defendant/appellant

Mr Hiteshkumar Chinubhai Mehta

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Order on Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant extension of time for Respondent to file Notice and Skeleton Argument

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time is granted as the Respondent’s ability to file required documents is contingent on Appellants’ payment of security for costs, and no prejudice is caused to the Appellants.

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted

Orders

  • EOT Application is granted.
  • Deadline for Respondent to file Notice (including cross-appeal) extended to 28 days after security for costs is paid by Appellants.