Omar Ben Hallam v Natixis [2025] DIFC CFI 016 (12 June 2025)

Omar Ben Hallam v Natixis [2025] DIFC CFI 016 (12 June 2025)

The Claimant failed to provide any admissible or sufficient justification for the retrospective extension of time sought; generic reasons do not satisfy the requirements for granting such an extension under the Rules of the DIFC Courts.

Citation
[2025] DIFC CFI 016
Parties
Claimant: Omar Ben Hallam; Defendant: Natixis
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
12 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application (extension of Time)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Case Management, Costs
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Case Management Costs

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Omar Ben Hallam

Claimant

Natixis

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application (extension of Time)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant is entitled to a retrospective extension of time to file a reply to the Defence
  2. 2 Whether the Case Management Conference should be postponed

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant failed to provide any admissible or sufficient justification for the retrospective extension of time sought; generic reasons do not satisfy the requirements for granting such an extension under the Rules of the DIFC Courts.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The Extension Application is dismissed.
  • The Claimant shall bear the costs of the Application.