01
Document overview
A translated database of published DIFC Courts judgments and orders.
- Court of First Instance.
- Court of Appeal.
- Small Claims Tribunal and court orders.
02
Scope and exclusions
Applies to
One selected published DIFC Courts judgment.
Limitations and exclusions
This is not a complete case-law database; appeals, corrections, reporting restrictions and the official text must be checked before use.
03
Document text
Ganesan Muthiah v Abdul Rahman Mohammad [2026] DIFC CA 007
2026-07-14
The DIFC Court of Appeal considered whether a Conflicts of Jurisdiction Tribunal decision requiring the DIFC Courts to cease hearing a claim retrospectively displaced orders that the DIFC Court had already made.
The appeal was allowed. The Tribunal had not vacated the earlier DIFC orders or denied their effect; the CFI orders and related costs order were set aside.
Published judgment text
Published paragraphs: 91Ganesan Muthiah v Abdul Rahman Mohammad [2026] DIFC CA 007
JULY 14, 2026 COURT OF APPEAL - JUDGMENTS
Claim No: CA 007/2026
IN THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS
In the name of His Highness Sheikh Mohammad Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Ruler of Dubai
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
BEFORE H.E. DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE ALI AL MADHANI, H.E. JUSTICE PATRICK ANTHONY KEANE AND H.E. JUSTICE LIM THIAM SUAN
BETWEEN
GANESAN MUTHIAH
Claimant/Respondent
and
ABDUL RAHMAN MOHAMMAD
Defendant/Appellant
Hearing : 22 June 2026 Counsel :
Mr Patrick Dillon – Malone instructed by Clyde & Co LLP, for the Appellant
Mr Quentin Tannock, instructed by Hamdan Al Shamsi Lawyers & Legal Consultants LLC, for the Respondent
Judgment : 14 July 2026
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF APPEAL
UPON the Part 7 Claim Form dated 9 June 2025 (the “Claim”)
AND UPON the Order of H.E. Justice Shamlan Al Sawalehi dated 20 October 2025 (the “20 October Order”)
AND UPON the Reasons of H.E. Justice Shamlan Al Sawalehi for the 20 October Order dated 13 January 2026 (the “13 January Order”)
AND UPON the Order of H.E. Justice Shamlan Al Sawalehi dated 21 January 2026 refusing permission to appeal the 20 October Order (the “21 January Order”)
AND UPON the Order of H.E. Justice Shamlan Al Sawalehi dated 29 January 2026 ordering that costs be paid by the Applicant to the Respondent (the “29 January Order”)
AND UPON the Defendants’ renewed Appeal Notice dated 6 February 2026 seeking permission to appeal the 20 October Order, the 21 January Order and the 29 January Order (the “Renewed Permission to Appeal”)
AND UPON the Order of H.E. Chief Justice Wayne Martin dated 26 March 2026 granting the Renewed Permission to Appeal on all grounds (other than those relating to the stay of the costs orders pending determination of the appeal) (the “26 March Order”)
AND UPON hearing Counsel for the Appellant and Counsel for the Respondent at the hearing before H.E. Deputy Chief Justice Ali Al Madhani, H.E. Justice Patrick Anthony Keane and H.E. Justice Lim Thiam Suan (the “Appeal Hearing”)
AND PURSUANT TO the Rules of the DIFC Courts (“RDC”)
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Appeal is allowed.
2. The orders made in the 20 October Order are set aside.
3. The costs order in the application to the CFI for permission to appeal made on 21 January 2026 is set aside.
4. The Respondent shall pay the Appellant’s costs of the Appeal fixed in the amount of AED 200,000.
5. The Respondent shall pay the Appellant’s costs of the application to the Chief Justice for permission to appeal on the standard basis to be assessed if not agreed
Issued by: Delvin Sumo Assistant Registrar Date of issue: 14 July 2026 At: 8am
SCHEDULE OF REASONS
1. Central to this appeal is the operation of Dubai Decree No. (29) of 2024 (the “Decree”). The Decree addresses the problems which arise where there is a conflict of jurisdiction between the DIFC Courts and any of the Judicial Entities being the Courts of Greater Dubai. The relevant provisions of the Decree are Articles (4) and (9). They are in the following terms:
05
Official primary source
DIFC Courts Judgments & Orders
Verify official text ↗