DIFC 254/2023, [2023] DIFC SCT 254
Mirku v Mifit
This case involved an unpaid invoice for contract work completed by a lawyer for a financial services company. Issues included whether the DIFC Courts had jurisdiction and if there had been a contract between the parties. This was not arbitration but litigation.
Background
The Claimant was Mirku a company located in London, the UK.
The Defendant was Mifit a company located in, DIFC, the UAE.
The Defendant appointed the Claimant to draft a share purchase agreement in addition to a loan agreement and advice in relation to a project known as Murri . The Claimant performed the task and delivered the Agreement on 14 March 2019.
The Claimant was assured on multiple occasions that the fee associated with the Agreement would be paid. However, the Defendant failed to settle the invoice.
The Claimant filed its claim with the DIFC Courts’ Small Claims Tribunal on 7 July 2023 seeking payment from the Defendant for an unpaid fee associated with the Agreement in the amount of USD 9,100.