Iman v Insuaf [2018] DIFC SCT 332 (22 November 2018)

Iman v Insuaf [2018] DIFC SCT 332 (22 November 2018)

The Defendant breached the maintenance obligations under the agreement by failing to deliver a habitable unit, specifically by not resolving the air conditioning issue, entitling the Claimant to a refund of all sums paid.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] DIFC SCT 332
Parties
Claimant: Iman; Defendant: Insuaf, Irati LLC
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
22 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Tribunal / Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed in part
Legal Topics
Tenancy Agreement, Breach of Contract, Refund of Deposit, Maintenance Obligations
Contract Law Landlord and Tenant Tenancy Agreement Breach of Contract Refund of Deposit Maintenance Obligations

Source-derived case record

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Iman

Claimant

Insuaf, Irati LLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Tribunal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant breached maintenance obligations under the tenancy agreement
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant is entitled to a refund of sums paid due to inhabitable premises

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant breached the maintenance obligations under the agreement by failing to deliver a habitable unit, specifically by not resolving the air conditioning issue, entitling the Claimant to a refund of all sums paid.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part

Orders

  • The Defendant shall pay the Claimant AED 59,500 (deposit, first cheque, agent fee).
  • The Claimant shall vacate the office unit.