DIFC [2022] DIFC 388

Muruk v Misli

The Defendant requested that a consent order be set aside due to confusion during a settlement discussion. The issue for the Court was whether the requirement under Rule 53.36(2) of the Rules of the DIFC Courts had been fulfilled.

Background

Upon the Consent Order of H.E. Justice Maha Al Mheiri dated 15 November 2022 (the “Order”)

And upon reviewing the Defendant’s Application No. SCT-388-2022/1 dated 11 May 2023 seeking to set aside the Order (the “Application”)

And upon viewing the Claimant’s reply to the Application dated 15 May 2023

And upon considering Rules 53.35, 53.39 and 53.37 of the Rules of the DIFC Courts (“RDC”)

It was hereby ordered that

1. The Application be granted.

2. The Order be set aside.

3. The SCT Registry shall list a new date for the Jurisdiction Hearing.

4. Each party shall bear their own costs.

The Claimant is Muruk (the “Claimant”) an individual located in Dubai, the UAE.

2. The Defendant is Misli (the “Defendant”), a company located in Dubai, the UAE.