AC Network Holding Ltd & Ors v Polymath Ekar SPV1 & Ors [2023] ADGMCFI 0013 (07 June 2023)

AC Network Holding Ltd & Ors v Polymath Ekar SPV1 & Ors [2023] ADGMCFI 0013 (07 June 2023)

The Court held that the application for permission to appeal was filed within time, based on its prior order that time to appeal would run from the final costs judgment, and that all grounds raised by the Claimants met the statutory benchmark for permission to appeal, warranting appellate consideration.

Citation
[2023] ADGMCFI 0013
Parties
Claimant: AC Network Holding Limited; Claimant: AC Pool Holding Limited; Claimant: Khalil Mohamed Binladin; Claimant: Dalia Khalil Binladin; Claimant: Horizon Light Investments LLC; Defendant: Polymath Ekar SPV1; Defendant: Polymath Ekar SPV2; Defendant: Vilhelm Nikolai Paus Hedberg; Defendant: Ravi Nagesh Bhusari; Defendant: Ali Hashemi; Defendant: Lux 2 Invco; Defendant: Clara Formations Limited; Defendant: Ekar Holding Limited
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
07 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial and Civil Appeal Permission Application / Permission to Appeal Granted
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted on all grounds set out in the Permission Application.
Legal Topics
Unlawful Means Conspiracy, Appeal Procedure, Costs Orders, Stare Decisis
Commercial Law Civil Procedure Unlawful Means Conspiracy Appeal Procedure Costs Orders Stare Decisis

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AC Network Holding Limited

Claimant

AC Pool Holding Limited

Claimant

Khalil Mohamed Binladin

Claimant

Dalia Khalil Binladin

Claimant

Horizon Light Investments LLC

Claimant

Polymath Ekar SPV1

Defendant

Polymath Ekar SPV2

Defendant

Vilhelm Nikolai Paus Hedberg

Defendant

Ravi Nagesh Bhusari

Defendant

Ali Hashemi

Defendant

Lux 2 Invco

Defendant

Clara Formations Limited

Defendant

Ekar Holding Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial and Civil Appeal Permission Application / Permission to Appeal Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for permission to appeal was filed within time
  2. 2 Whether Mr Hashemi was liable for unlawful means conspiracy
  3. 3 Whether the Court was bound by English Court of Appeal authority

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the application for permission to appeal was filed within time, based on its prior order that time to appeal would run from the final costs judgment, and that all grounds raised by the Claimants met the statutory benchmark for permission to appeal, warranting appellate consideration.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted on all grounds set out in the Permission Application.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal is granted on all grounds set out in the Permission Application.
  • Costs of the Permission Application are to be in the appeal, save that there is to be no order as to costs in terms of the Defendants’ Procedural Objection.