May 25, 2022 court of first instance - Orders
Claim No: CFI 029/2018
THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS
IN THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
BETWEEN
THE INDUSTRIAL GROUP LTD
Claimant/Counterclaim Defendant
and
ABDELAZIM EL SHIKH EL FADIL HAMID
Defendant/Counterclaim Claimant
PROCEDURAL ORDER WITH REASONS OF JUSTICE SIR RICHARD FIELD
UPON considering the Defendant’s Submissions on Costs dated 14 April 2022
AND UPON considering the Claimant’s Submissions on Interest and Costs dated 27 April 2022
AND UPON considering the Defendants Submissions on Interest served late by email on 19 April 2022 together with the Defendant’s prior Submissions on Interest dated 24 February 2020 and the Claimant’s prior Submissions on Interest dated 5 March 2020
AND UPON considering the Defendant’s Reply Submission on Costs dated 4 May 2022
AND UPON considering the letter dated 8 May 2022 sent to the Court by the Claimant’s Attorneys, Addleshaw Goddard
AND UPON considering the Defendant’s response to the aforesaid letter by email to the Registry
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Defendant is debarred from relying on his late submissions on interest served on 19 April 2022 so that his claim for interest will be determined by reference to his Interest Submissions dated 24 February 2020, the Claimant’s Submissions on Interest dated 5 March 2020 and the Claimant’s Submissions on Interest contained in its Submissions on Interest and Costs dated 27 April 2022.
2. The Defendant is debarred from relying on the submissions contained in paragraphs 21, 23, 24, 29, 31 and 32 of his Reply Submission on Costs dated 4 May 2022.
3. The Defendant may continue his claim for a costs interim payment on the following conditions: (a) he must confirm to the Claimant that he will proceed with this claim within 3 days of the date of this Order; (b) he will be liable to pay the Claimant’s costs of responding to the claim.
4. If the Defendant confirms to the Claimant that he will be continuing with his said claim for an interim payment in accordance with paragraph 3 (a) above, the Claimant will have 9 days thereafter in which to serve its response to the claim and the Defendant will have 4 days thereafter to serve his submissions in reply.
Issued by:
Nour Hineidi
Registrar
Date of Issue: 25 May 2022
At: 12pm
SCHEDULE OF REASONS
1. The timetable set for the service of submissions on interest and costs was: (i) the Defendant to serve his submissions on 14 April 2022; (ii) the Claimant to serve its submissions in response by 22 April 2022; and (iii) the Defendant to serve his reply submissions by 29 April 2022.
2. The Defendant failed to include any submissions on interest in his Costs Submissions served on 14 April. This meant that his only extant submissions on interest were those served on 24 February 2020 which was over two years before judgment was issued on the Claimant’s Claim and the Defendant’s Counterclaim was issued.
3. The Defendant acted in breach of the aforesaid timetable in serving his fresh submissions on interest on 19 April 2022, just 3 days before the Claimant’s Submissions on Interest and Costs were due to be served. This resulted in a quite unnecessary extension of the time for the service of the Claimant’s submissions.
4. I accept the Claimant’s contention that: (a) the Defendant in his submissions served on 19 April 2022 has recast his claim for interest so that he now claims interest at two different rates for 2 periods of time on a different legal basis to the one he asserted in his submissions dated 24 February 2020; (b) responding to this new claim for interest will involve the Claimant in significant work.
5. It is also the case that the Defendant, instead of responding to the Claimant’s submissions served on 27 April 2022, has raised completely new claims alleging professional misconduct against the Claimant’s counsel and seeking a costs interim payment that were not made in his submissions dated 14 April 2022. In my opinion, the allegations made in paragraphs 21, 23, 24, 29, 31 and 32 of his Reply Submission on Costs dated 4 May 2022 ought never to have been made given in particular that they had not been advanced in his submissions served on 14 April 2022.
6. Given these serious procedural breaches on the part of the Defendant, I conclude that justice and fair play requires that he be subject to the order made herein which still allows him to pursue his interim payment application but on terms that he pays the costs incurred by the Claimant in responding thereto.