Zuzana Kapova v (1) Miloslav Makovini (2) Pharm Trade Holding Ltd and Mr. Sebastian Kapa [2026] DIFC CFI 004 (29 April 2026)

Zuzana Kapova v (1) Miloslav Makovini (2) Pharm Trade Holding Ltd and Mr. Sebastian Kapa [2026] DIFC CFI 004 (29 April 2026)

The Claimant's failure to pay the first instalment constituted a material breach under the Settlement Agreement, entitling the First Defendant to immediate judgment for the accelerated settlement sum. There were no triable issues of fact or law regarding misrepresentation, non-disclosure, or duress, and the agreement expressly excluded such defences absent fraud. The stay of proceedings was properly lifted to permit enforcement, and summary judgment was appropriate.

Citation
[2026] DIFC CFI 004
Parties
Claimant: Zuzana Kapova; First Defendant: Miloslav Makovini; Second Defendant: Pharm Trade Holding Ltd; Third Party: Mr. Sebastian Kapa
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
29 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim / Post Settlement Enforcement; Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Judgment for the First Defendant; summary judgment granted; permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Settlement Agreement Enforcement, Summary Judgment, Stay of Proceedings, Material Breach, Interest on Judgment, Costs
Contract Law Civil Procedure Settlement Agreement Enforcement Summary Judgment Stay of Proceedings Material Breach Interest on Judgment 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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zuzana Kapova

Claimant

Miloslav Makovini

First Defendant

Pharm Trade Holding Ltd

Second Defendant

Mr. Sebastian Kapa

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim / Post Settlement Enforcement; Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the stay of proceedings should be lifted to enforce the settlement agreement
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's failure to pay the first instalment constitutes a material breach triggering the accelerated settlement sum
  3. 3 Whether there are triable issues regarding misrepresentation, non-disclosure, or duress that would prevent enforcement of the settlement agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant's failure to pay the first instalment constituted a material breach under the Settlement Agreement, entitling the First Defendant to immediate judgment for the accelerated settlement sum. There were no triable issues of fact or law regarding misrepresentation, non-disclosure, or duress, and the agreement expressly excluded such defences absent fraud. The stay of proceedings was properly lifted to permit enforcement, and summary judgment was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the First Defendant; summary judgment granted; permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Stay of proceedings lifted to permit enforcement and pursuit of immediate judgment application.
  • Immediate judgment application granted.