Oswin v (1) Otila (2) Ondray [2025] DIFC ARB 032 (16 September 2025)

Oswin v (1) Otila (2) Ondray [2025] DIFC ARB 032 (16 September 2025)

The DIFC Court has jurisdiction to grant interim measures in support of a DIFC-seated arbitration under the JVA, as the arbitration agreement is valid and enforceable, and the parties' agreement to arbitrate overrides conflicting jurisdiction clauses in related agreements and any purported restrictions under UAE federal law.

Citation
[2025] DIFC ARB 032
Parties
Claimant: Oswin; First Defendant: Otila; Second Defendant: Ondray
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
16 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Related Application / Interim Injunction Continuation and Jurisdiction Challenge
Outcome
Second Defendant's applications refused; injunction continued; costs awarded to Claimant.
Legal Topics
Interim Measures, Jurisdiction, Joint Venture Agreements, Arbitration Clause Interpretation
Arbitration Corporate Law Interim Measures Jurisdiction Joint Venture Agreements Arbitration Clause Interpretation

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oswin

Claimant

Otila

First Defendant

Ondray

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Related Application / Interim Injunction Continuation and Jurisdiction Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the DIFC Court have jurisdiction to grant interim measures in support of a DIFC-seated arbitration under the JVA?
  2. 2 Is the arbitration agreement in the JVA valid and enforceable despite conflicting jurisdiction clauses in related agreements?
  3. 3 Does UAE federal law or Abu Dhabi court jurisdiction override the parties' agreement to arbitrate in the DIFC?

Ratio Decidendi

The DIFC Court has jurisdiction to grant interim measures in support of a DIFC-seated arbitration under the JVA, as the arbitration agreement is valid and enforceable, and the parties' agreement to arbitrate overrides conflicting jurisdiction clauses in related agreements and any purported restrictions under UAE federal law.

Court Disposition

Second Defendant's applications refused; injunction continued; costs awarded to Claimant.

Orders

  • The injunction is continued until further order or determination by the arbitral tribunal.
  • Second Defendant shall pay the costs of the Claimant’s application to continue the injunction, the costs of the Second Defendant’s application to discharge the same, and the costs of the hearing on 8 September 2025.