Judgment · Court of First Instance
CFI 047/2019 Caterpillar Financial Services (Dubai) Limited v (1) Omer Transport LLC (2) Crushers & Quarries Omer Transport LLC (3) Mr Ayman Abdul Baki
A reference record of CFI 047/2019, drawn from the decision's own text. It sets out who the parties were, who decided it, what the decision did and where to read it. It does not summarise the court's reasoning or offer advice on it.
Where cases like this arise in our work: DIFC Courts Litigation
At a glance
| Claim number | CFI 047/2019 |
| Court | DIFC Courts — Court of First Instance |
| Decision | Judgment |
| Date | 5 April 2022 |
| Date of issue | 29 March 2022 |
| Operative orders | 10 |
| Numbered paragraphs | 63 |
| Recitals | 5 |
Parties to CFI 047/2019
As the decision names them, with the role each appears in.
| Party | Role |
|---|---|
| Caterpillar Financial Services (Dubai) Limited | Claimant |
| (3) Mr Ayman Abdul Baki | Defendants |
Decisions in CFI 047/2019
The DIFC Courts have published 9 decisions under this claim number. The dates and types below are the court's own record of the sequence.
| Date | Type |
|---|---|
| 16 February 2020 | Order |
| 16 February 2020 | Order |
| 22 June 2020 | Order |
| 28 July 2020 | Order |
| 15 September 2020 | Order |
| 18 November 2020 | Order |
| 31 March 2021 | Order |
| 29 March 2022 | Order |
| 5 April 2022 | Judgment |
Sums named in the judgment
These figures appear in the text of the decision. They are reproduced as amounts only — what each relates to is set out in the judgment itself.
- USD 2,495,933.69
- USD 681.43
- AED 450,000
- USD 1,370,827.39
- USD 1,356,630.36
- USD 1,381,792.50
Authorities cited in CFI 047/2019
The decision refers to the following. They are listed as cited — what each was relied on for is set out in the decision itself.
Legislation and practice directions
- DIFC Law No. 10 of 2004 DIFC law
- DIFC Law No. 5 of 2007 DIFC law
- Practice Direction No. 4 of 2017 Practice Direction
Rules of the DIFC Courts applied
RDC 4.2, RDC 4.51, RDC 9.31, RDC 24.1, RDC 24.6, RDC 36.26, RDC 37.17, RDC 38.18 — see the RDC.
Other decisions citing the same authority
Records of other DIFC Courts decisions that cite at least one of the same instruments. Shared authority is not shared reasoning — each decision turns on its own facts.
- CFI 060/2021 — CFI 060/2021 Lumbini v Lotika also cites DIFC Law No. 10 of 2004
- CFI 032/2020 — CFI 032/2020 Kaamil v (1) Kaawa (2) Kaabii (3) Kadija (4) Kaemon (5) also cites DIFC Law No. 10 of 2004
- CA 011/2021 — Musaab Tag Elsir Abdelsalam v Expresso Telecom Group [2021] DIFC CA also cites DIFC Law No. 10 of 2004
- CA 007/2020 — Lahela v Lameez [2020] DIFC CA 007 also cites DIFC Law No. 10 of 2004
- CFI 031/2019 — CFI 031/2019 Mr Ebrahim Al-jassim v (1) Socii Synergy Investment LLC also cites DIFC Law No. 10 of 2004
- CFI-060-2018 — CFI 060/2018 Timothy David Monks v (1) William Robert Meadows (2) Ad also cites DIFC Law No. 10 of 2004
Primary source
Everything on this page comes from the decision itself. The link goes to the court that issued it.
Acting on a court of first instance matter
This page is a record, not advice. If a matter of your own turns on the kind of question CFI 047/2019 dealt with, speak to us about the facts.