Arbitral Digest

Matter

Oswin v Otila and Ondray (DIFC Court of First Instance ARB 032/2025)

Arbitration between Oswin and Otila concerned Court continued the interim injunction until further order or determination by the; related court records address the award and its treatment.

  • International commercial arbitration
  • Anti-suit injunctions
  • Interim measures
  • Jurisdiction and arbitration agreements
Case no.
ARB 032/2025
Seat
United Arab Emirates
Applicable rules
DIFC-LCIA Arbitration Rules

Procedural record

  1. 16 September 2025United Arab Emirates

    16 September 2025United Arab Emirates

    Order with Reasons of the DIFC Court of First Instance in case ARB 032/2025 dated 16 September 2025

    DIFC Court of First Instance

    Decision summary
    The Court continued the interim injunction until further order or determination by the tribunal of the matters raised in the Notice of Arbitration, and ordered the Second Defendant to pay the costs of the continuation application, the discharge application, and the return-date hearing. It held that the dispute fell within the Joint Venture Agreement’s DIFC-seated arbitration clause and that the DIFC Court had jurisdiction to grant interim and precautionary measures in support of that arbitration.

    Participants

    Oswin
    Representative
    Mr Khan (For: Oswin)
    Otila
    Representative
    Mr Ismail (For: Otila · Ondray)
    Ondray
    Representative
    Mr Ismail (For: Otila · Ondray)
    DIFC Court of First Instance
    Judge
    Jeremy Cooke
    Other
    Witness
    Orman

    Authorities cited

    11
    • Narciso v Nash [2024] ARB 009
      case
    • DIFC Arbitration Law No. 1 of 2008
      statute
    • DIFC Law No. 2 of 2025 Concerning Dubai International Financial Centre Courts (DIFC Law No. 2 of 2025)
      statute
    • UAE Federal Decree-Law No. 30 of 2020 amending Law No. 5 of 1985 (UAE Federal Decree-Law No. 30 of 2020)
      statute
    • Federal Civil Procedures Law No. 42 of 2022
      statute
    • Commercial Cassation Appeal No. 21 of 2018
      case
    • UAE Provisional Constitution
      statute
    • Mustill & Boyd, paragraphs 4-15–4-26
      academic
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC 43.48)
      court rule
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC 43.50)
      court rule
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC Part 25)
      court rule

    4 months and 7 days later · 129 days

  2. 23 January 2026United Arab Emirates

    23 January 2026United Arab Emirates

    Order with Reasons of the DIFC Court of Appeal in case ARB 032/2025 dated 23 January 2026

    DIFC Court of Appeal

    Decision summary
    The Court of Appeal dismissed the renewed application for permission to appeal the continuation of an interim injunction, and also dismissed the applications for a stay, authorisation declarations, and admission of new evidence. It held that the DIFC-seated arbitration agreement in the Joint Venture Agreement supported the DIFC Court’s supervisory jurisdiction and ordered the Second Defendant to pay the Claimant’s costs on an indemnity basis.

    Participants

    Oswin
    Otila
    Ondray
    Representative
    Mr Ismail (For: Ondray)
    DIFC Court of Appeal
    Judge
    Wayne Martin
    Judge
    Jeremy Cooke

    Authorities cited

    5
    • DIFC Law No. 2 of 2025 Concerning Dubai International Financial Centre Courts (DIFC Law No. 2 of 2025)
      statute
    • DIFC Arbitration Law No. 1 of 2008
      statute
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC 44.5)
      court rule
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC 44.19)
      court rule
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC 44.110)
      court rule

    17 days later · 17 days

  3. 9 February 2026United Arab Emirates

    9 February 2026United Arab Emirates

    Committal Order with Reasons of the DIFC Court of First Instance in case ARB 032/2025 dated 9 February 2026

    DIFC Court of First Instance

    Decision summary
    The Court refused the adjournment application and granted the committal application. It found Ondray, Ozlynn, and Ozlem in continuing contempt of court for deliberately breaching the injunction and anti-suit injunction, referred them to the Attorney General of Dubai, imposed a USD 75,000 fine on each, and ordered joint and several indemnity costs, subject to the stated purge conditions.

    Participants

    Oswin
    Otila
    Ondray
    Representative
    Mr Ismail (For: Ondray · Ozlynn · Ozlem)
    Ozlynn
    Representative
    Mr Ismail (For: Ondray · Ozlynn · Ozlem)
    Ozlem
    Representative
    Mr Ismail (For: Ondray · Ozlynn · Ozlem)
    DIFC Court of First Instance
    Judge
    Jeremy Cooke
    Other
    Witness
    Osgood
    Witness
    Mahmoud Hussain Ali Ahmad
    Witness
    Orali

    Authorities cited

    7
    • Lateef v Liyela [2020] DIFC ARB 017
      case
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC Part 52)
      court rule
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC 52.9(1))
      court rule
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC 52.10)
      court rule
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC 52.12)
      court rule
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC 52.26)
      court rule
    • Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC 52.37(1))
      court rule

Matter record

Report a correction

Oswin v Otila and Ondray (DIFC Court of First Instance ARB 032/2025) · Matter