Obert (2) Ona v Ondray [2025] DIFC ARB 014 (09 October 2025)

Obert (2) Ona v Ondray [2025] DIFC ARB 014 (09 October 2025)

The Court found that the arbitration clause in the Consultancy Agreement survived termination and provided jurisdiction for the arbitral tribunal; the Arbitrator acted within his mandate; no grounds for annulment under Article 41(2) were established; procedural fairness was observed; and public policy was not violated. The Award is therefore recognised and enforced.

Citation
[2025] DIFC ARB 014
Parties
Claimant: Obert; Claimant: Ona; Defendant: Ondray
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
09 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Claim (recognition and Enforcement of Award) / Order With Reasons (first Instance)
Outcome
Claim granted; Final Award recognised as binding; costs to Claimants.
Legal Topics
Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal, Public Policy in Arbitration, Procedural Fairness, Separability of Arbitration Clause
Arbitration Contract Law Civil Procedure Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal Public Policy in Arbitration Procedural Fairness Separability of Arbitration Clause

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

Parties

Obert

Claimant

Ona

Claimant

Ondray

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Claim (recognition and Enforcement of Award) / Order With Reasons (first Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Final Award should be recognised and enforced under DIFC Arbitration Law
  2. 2 Whether the arbitral tribunal had jurisdiction under the Consultancy Agreement
  3. 3 Whether the Award should be set aside for breach of public policy or procedural unfairness

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the arbitration clause in the Consultancy Agreement survived termination and provided jurisdiction for the arbitral tribunal; the Arbitrator acted within his mandate; no grounds for annulment under Article 41(2) were established; procedural fairness was observed; and public policy was not violated. The Award is therefore recognised and enforced.

Court Disposition

Claim granted; Final Award recognised as binding; costs to Claimants.

Orders

  • The Claimants’ Arbitration Claim is granted.
  • The Final Award is recognised as binding.