DIFC 094/2021 issued on 7 December 2021
Latins v Lidina
This case involved whether the DIFC courts had jurisdiction. A key point was the case had involved a warehousing contract. If this contract was treated as a property rental contract the onshore courts would have jurisdiction. If it was treated as a contract for warehousing (and logistics services) the DIFC courts would have jurisdiction.
Background
This case was an appeal by the Claimant against the Order of an SCT Judge dated 8 November 2020, in terms of which she upheld the Defendant’s challenge to the jurisdiction of the DIFC Courts, held that the DIFC Courts did not have jurisdiction over the claim and dismissed the case.
The Defendant, who appeared by Mr Lutan, its CEO, asked for an adjournment of no more than 10 days so that a lawyer could be instructed. this was refused. The court was satisfied that there would be no undue prejudice to the Defendant. There had already been considerable delay in the case and the judgment appealed against already sets out cogently and in some detail the arguments which the Defendant wished to advance.