Laela v (1) Ladessa Lufak (2) Lakshmana [2022] DIFC CT 165 (12 July 2022)

Laela v (1) Ladessa Lufak (2) Lakshmana [2022] DIFC CT 165 (12 July 2022)

The First Defendant is liable for overstay rent, penalty, outstanding utilities, and maintenance costs due to failure to vacate or renew the lease, and for subleasing beyond the permitted term without consent. The Second Defendant, having paid all rent in good faith, is not liable to the Claimant. Possession reverts to the Claimant after expiry of the sublease.

Citation
[2022] DIFC CT 165
Parties
Claimant: Laela; First Defendant: Ladessa Lufak; Second Defendant: Lakshmana (also referred to as Lamariya)
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
12 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Tribunal / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Claim allowed in part against First Defendant; dismissed against Second Defendant.
Legal Topics
Overstay Rent, Sublease Without Consent, Possession of Premises, Outstanding Utility Charges, Maintenance Liability
Landlord and Tenant Contract Law Overstay Rent Sublease Without Consent Possession of Premises Outstanding Utility Charges Maintenance Liability

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

Parties

Laela

Claimant

Ladessa Lufak

First Defendant

Lakshmana (also referred to as Lamariya)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Tribunal / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Defendant is liable for overstay rent and penalties after expiry of lease agreement
  2. 2 Whether the Second Defendant is liable for any amounts to the Claimant
  3. 3 Whether the First Defendant is liable for outstanding utility charges and maintenance costs

Ratio Decidendi

The First Defendant is liable for overstay rent, penalty, outstanding utilities, and maintenance costs due to failure to vacate or renew the lease, and for subleasing beyond the permitted term without consent. The Second Defendant, having paid all rent in good faith, is not liable to the Claimant. Possession reverts to the Claimant after expiry of the sublease.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part against First Defendant; dismissed against Second Defendant.

Orders

  • Second Defendant to vacate premises on 22 January 2023.
  • Possession reverts to Claimant as of 22 January 2023.