Arbitral Digest

Matter

Mirma v Mobal (DIFC Court of Appeal ARB-004-2022 and ARB-005-2023)

Case no.
ARB-004-2022 and ARB-005-2023
Seat
United Arab Emirates
  1. 2 November 2021United Arab Emirates

    2 November 2021United Arab Emirates

    ICC Main Award dated 2 November 2021

    Decision summary
    The tribunal awarded Mobal USD 2,015,767 for the wooden dhow variation, USD 57,074,115 for the detention of its marine spread, USD 303,574 for the detention of two chartered vessels, and USD 18,435,950 for repeated work after the restart. On Mirma's counterclaim concerning Mobal's dealings with an Iraqi Member of Parliament and his son, the tribunal awarded Mirma USD 37,738,777 over the whole contract, including USD 19,381,458 in respect of the identified claims, and permitted Mirma to withhold USD 1,144,031.25 on an invoice.

    Supporting details

    2 participants
    Mirma
    Mobal

    1 year, 3 months and 6 days later · 463 days

  2. 8 February 2023United Arab Emirates

    8 February 2023United Arab Emirates

    Judgment of the DIFC Court of First Instance in ARB-004-2022 and ARB-005-2023 dated 8 February 2023

    DIFC Court of First Instance

    Decision summary
    The Court dismissed Mirma's application to set aside the Main Award and granted Mobal's application for recognition and enforcement of the Main Award in the DIFC.

    Supporting details

    3 participants
    Mirma
    Mobal
    DIFC Court of First Instance

    1 month and 12 days later · 40 days

  3. 20 March 2023United Arab Emirates

    20 March 2023United Arab Emirates

    Recognition Order of the DIFC Court of First Instance in ARB-005-2023 dated 20 March 2023

    DIFC Court of First Instance

    Decision summary
    The Court granted Mobal's application to recognise and enforce the Main Award in the DIFC.

    Supporting details

    3 participants
    Mirma
    Mobal
    DIFC Court of First Instance

    5 months and 23 days later · 176 days

  4. 12 September 2023United Arab Emirates

    12 September 2023United Arab Emirates

    Order of the DIFC Court of First Instance in ARB-004-2022 and ARB-005-2023 dated 12 September 2023

    DIFC Court of First Instance

    Decision summary
    The Court dismissed Mirma's application for permission to appeal the 8 February 2023 judgment, dismissed the application to set aside the recognition order, and dismissed the application for permission to advance a counterclaim for enforcement of the CC4 Award. The related applications for security and adjournment fell away, with the order allocating costs between the parties.

    Supporting details

    4 authorities · 3 participants
    Mirma
    Mobal
    DIFC Court of First Instance

    Authorities cited

    4
    • DIFC Arbitration Law 2008 (DIFC Law No 1 of 2008)
      statute
    • Iraqi Civil Code, Article 7
      statute
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC)
      rules
    • Satyam Enterprises v Burton ([2021] EWCA Civ 287)
      case

    1 year, 1 month and 27 days later · 423 days

  5. 8 November 2024United Arab Emirates

    8 November 2024United Arab Emirates

    Order of the DIFC Court of Appeal in the cases ARB-004-2022 and ARB-005-2023 dated 8 November 2024

    DIFC Court of Appeal

    Decision summary
    The Court dismissed the renewed permission applications in ARB-004-2022 and ARB-005-2023 on all grounds, directed that the ARB-005-2023 permission application be heard without first being heard by the first-instance judge, and ordered the applicant to pay the respondent's costs of each application.

    Supporting details

    5 participants
    Mirma
    Mobal
    DIFC Court of Appeal
  6. 8 November 2024United Arab Emirates

    8 November 2024United Arab Emirates

    Reasons for the Order of the DIFC Court of Appeal in the cases ARB-004-2022 and ARB-005-2023 dated 8 November 2024

    DIFC Court of Appeal

    Decision summary
    The Court of Appeal dismissed Mirma's renewed applications for permission to appeal in ARB-004-2022 and ARB-005-2023, holding that none of the proposed grounds had a real prospect of success and that there was no other compelling reason for an appeal. It also dismissed the application to set aside the recognition order and the application to enforce the CC4 Award by counterclaim, and made related costs orders.

    Supporting details

    6 authorities · 10 participants
    Mirma
    Representative
    James Barratt (For: Mirma)
    Representative
    Vinson & Elkins (For: Mirma)
    Mobal
    Representative
    Christopher Harris KC (For: Mobal)
    Representative
    Eversheds Sutherland (For: Mobal)
    Representative
    Afridi & Angell (For: Mobal)
    DIFC Court of Appeal

    Authorities cited

    6
    • DIFC Arbitration Law 2008 (DIFC Law No 1 of 2008)
      statute
    • Iraqi Civil Code, Article 7
      statute
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC)
      rules
    • Reliance Industries Ltd v Union of India ([2018] EWHC 822 (Comm))
      case
    • Satyam Enterprises v Burton ([2021] EWCA Civ 287)
      case
    • United States Code, Title 9 (9 U.S.C. § 15)
      statute
  7. Date not availableUnited Arab Emirates

Matter record

Report a correction

Mirma v Mobal (DIFC Court of Appeal ARB-004-2022 and ARB-005-2023) · Matter