DIFC 385/2023
Naima v Narciso
This case was an appeal of a small claims tribunal ruling on lawyers' costs in an employment dispute. Issues included whether costs had been increased by unnecessary work on a settlement agreement and use of London based lawyers.
Background
Under Rule 44.118 of the Rules of the DIFC Courts the Court of First Instance will allow an appeal from a decision of the SCT where the decision was either wrong in relation to a question of law, unjust because of procedural unfairness or a miscarriage of justice and/or wrong in relation to any other matter provided for in or under DIFC law. At a hearing of the appeal on 11 January 2024 the Claimant it was ruled the claimant could not succeed on this appeal because it cannot satisfy those requirements. The SCT Judge’s findings of fact were not reviewable unless there was some procedural unfairness, miscarriage of justice or error of law. There was no realistic prospects of success on this appeal.