September 20, 2023 COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE - ORDERS
Claim No. CFI 004/2023
THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS
IN THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
BETWEEN
ZUZANA KAPOVA
Claimant/Appellant
and
(1) MILOSLAV MAKOVINI
(2) PHARM TRADE HOLDING LTD
Defendants/Respondents
ORDER WITH REASONS OF H.E. JUSTICE NASSIR AL NASSER
UPON the Order with Reasons of H.E. Justice Nassir Al Nasser granting the Defendants’ Application No. CFI-004-2023/5 for security over costs (the “Order”) dated 1 August 2023
AND UPON reviewing the Claimant’s Appeal Notice dated 14 August 2023 seeking permission to appeal against the Order (the “Appeal Notice”)
AND UPON the Defendants’ response to the Appeal Notice dated 4 September 2023
AND UPON reviewing all relevant material in the case file
AND UPON reviewing 44.19 of the Rules of the DIFC Courts (the “RDC”)
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Claimant’s Appeal Notice shall be granted.
2. Each party shall bear their own costs.
Issued by:
Hayley Norton
Assistant Registrar
Date of issue: 20 September 2023
At: 11am
SCHEDULE OF REASONS
1. This is an application seeking permission to appeal brought by the Claimant in this Claim (the “Appeal Notice”), against the Order issued on 1 August 2023 (the “Order”).
2. The background of this Claim is relevantly set out in the Order and need not be repeated in the course of this decision.
3. In accordance with RDC 44.19, permission to appeal may be granted in limited situations, being when there is a real prospect that the appeal would succeed, or where there is another compelling reason why the appeal should be heard.
4. In review of the Appeal Notice filed by the Claimant, I find that the Appeal does meet the requirements under RDC 44.19. I briefly set out my reasons below.
5. The Claimant provided that she is the sole shareholder and director of PT Data Services FZE, a free zone company incorporated in Umm Al Quwain Free Zone. The Claimant submits that she had made a term deposit of AED 1,000,000 with Mashreq Bank of behalf of PT Data Services FZE.
6. The above can be construed to be a position from which the Claimant can argue that there is a real prospect of success pursuant to RDC 44.19.
7. Therefore, in light of the Claimant’s submission, I am of the view that the appeal does have a prospect of success and I also do find that is a compelling reason for the appeal to be heard, and therefore the Appeal Notice satisfies the requirements of RDC 44.19.
8. Each party shall bear their own costs.