Muhallam v Muhaf [2024] DIFC ARB 021 (28 August 2024)

Muhallam v Muhaf [2024] DIFC ARB 021 (28 August 2024)

The Defendant was in contempt of court for failing to comply with the Enforcement Order and Fixing of Time Order, including provision of security, asset disclosure, and compliance with freezing and ancillary orders. The Defendant's offer of alternative security was inadequate and did not constitute compliance. The court granted the Contempt Application, imposed a fine, referred the matter to the Attorney General, and granted permission to issue a writ of sequestration against the Defendant's assets.

Citation
[2024] DIFC ARB 021
Parties
Claimant: Muhallam; Defendant: Muhaf
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
28 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Enforcement and Contempt Proceedings / Post Award Enforcement and Contempt Determination in Court of First Instance
Outcome
Contempt application granted; sequestration application granted; fine imposed; costs awarded to Claimant; matter referred to Attorney General.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Contempt of Court, Freezing Orders, Asset Disclosure, Sequestration, Proprietary Injunctions
Arbitration Civil Procedure Commercial Law Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Contempt of Court Freezing Orders Asset Disclosure Sequestration +1 more

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

Parties

Muhallam

Claimant

Muhaf

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Enforcement and Contempt Proceedings / Post Award Enforcement and Contempt Determination in Court of First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant is in contempt of court for non-compliance with enforcement and asset disclosure orders
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant's offer of alternative security satisfies the court's orders
  3. 3 Whether a writ of sequestration should be issued against the Defendant's assets

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant was in contempt of court for failing to comply with the Enforcement Order and Fixing of Time Order, including provision of security, asset disclosure, and compliance with freezing and ancillary orders. The Defendant's offer of alternative security was inadequate and did not constitute compliance. The court granted the Contempt Application, imposed a fine, referred the matter to the Attorney General, and granted permission to issue a writ of sequestration against the Defendant's assets.

Court Disposition

Contempt application granted; sequestration application granted; fine imposed; costs awarded to Claimant; matter referred to Attorney General.

Orders

  • Defendant found guilty of contempt of court.
  • Permission granted to issue a writ of sequestration against Defendant's assets.