Likitif v Luvaun [2022] DIFC ARB 028 (25 October 2022)

Likitif v Luvaun [2022] DIFC ARB 028 (25 October 2022)

The presence of a binding arbitration agreement in the subcontract requires dismissal of the claim before the DIFC Courts, as the dispute must be resolved by arbitration under the DIAC Rules 2022 with the seat in DIFC.

Citation
[2022] DIFC ARB 028
Parties
Claimant: Likitif; Defendant: Luvaun
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
25 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Related Court Application / Order With Reasons at First Instance
Outcome
Claim dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to arbitration agreement
Legal Topics
Arbitration Agreement, Jurisdiction, Enforcement of Arbitration Clause, Subcontract Disputes
Arbitration Contract Arbitration Agreement Jurisdiction Enforcement of Arbitration Clause Subcontract Disputes

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

Parties

Likitif

Claimant

Luvaun

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Related Court Application / Order With Reasons at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the DIFC Courts have jurisdiction in light of an arbitration agreement in the subcontract
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration agreement is binding and enforceable in respect of the claim

Ratio Decidendi

The presence of a binding arbitration agreement in the subcontract requires dismissal of the claim before the DIFC Courts, as the dispute must be resolved by arbitration under the DIAC Rules 2022 with the seat in DIFC.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to arbitration agreement

Orders

  • Claimant’s claim is dismissed
  • Each party shall bear their own costs