Lonod v Lacini [2021] DIFC SCT 225 (20 September 2021)

Lonod v Lacini [2021] DIFC SCT 225 (20 September 2021)

The Claimant failed to prove that any revenue was generated to trigger payment under the First Contract, and the Second Contract was expressly declared a sham and not legally binding. No evidence of aggravated damages was provided. Therefore, all claims are dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] DIFC SCT 225
Parties
Claimant: Lanod; Defendant: Lacini
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
20 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Tribunal / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Independent Contractor Agreements, Employment Contracts, Remuneration Claims, Sham Contracts, Aggravated Damages
Contract Law Employment Law Independent Contractor Agreements Employment Contracts Remuneration Claims Sham Contracts Aggravated Damages

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lanod

Claimant

Lacini

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Tribunal / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant is entitled to reimbursement of personal expenses under the First Contract
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant is entitled to salary under the Second Contract
  3. 3 Whether the Second Contract is legally binding

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant failed to prove that any revenue was generated to trigger payment under the First Contract, and the Second Contract was expressly declared a sham and not legally binding. No evidence of aggravated damages was provided. Therefore, all claims are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The Claimant’s Claims are dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.