Galina v Grage [2015] DIFC SCT 231 (02 March 2016)

Galina v Grage [2015] DIFC SCT 231 (02 March 2016)

The Claimant is entitled to the celebrity procurement fees for services performed under the contract, as the Agreement did not require her to guarantee the celebrities' subsequent performance. Claims for the Paddock Ticket, ticket sales, and general damages fail due to lack of contractual or evidentiary basis.

Citation
[2015] DIFC SCT 231
Parties
Claimant: Galima FZ LLC; Defendant: Grage
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
02 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Tribunal / Judgment
Outcome
Partially allowed
Legal Topics
Consultancy Agreement, Breach of Contract, Damages, Jurisdiction
Contract Law Consultancy Agreement Breach of Contract Damages Jurisdiction

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Galima FZ LLC

Claimant

Grage

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Tribunal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Entitlement to celebrity procurement fees under Consultancy Agreement
  2. 2 Entitlement to value of Formula 1 Paddock Ticket as contract perk
  3. 3 Entitlement to 20% of ticket sales revenue

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant is entitled to the celebrity procurement fees for services performed under the contract, as the Agreement did not require her to guarantee the celebrities' subsequent performance. Claims for the Paddock Ticket, ticket sales, and general damages fail due to lack of contractual or evidentiary basis.

Court Disposition

Partially allowed

Orders

  • Defendant to pay Claimant AED 3675 for celebrity attendance fee.
  • Defendant to pay Claimant's court fees of AED 1470.