Judgment or Order · Small Claims Tribunal
Lamar v Luine [2022] DIFC SCT 108
A reference record of SCT 108/2022, 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 | SCT 108/2022 |
| Court | DIFC Courts — Small Claims Tribunal |
| Decision | Judgment or Order |
| Date | 24 May 2022 |
| Date of issue | 20 May 2022 |
| Operative orders | 4 |
| Numbered paragraphs | 67 |
| Recitals | 3 |
Parties to SCT 108/2022
As the decision names them, with the role each appears in.
| Party | Role |
|---|---|
| Lamar | Claimant |
| Luine | Defendant |
Sums named in the judgment or order
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.
- AED 115,850
- USD 50,000
- AED 2,317
- AED 140,436
- AED 138,000
- AED 61,361
Authorities cited in SCT 108/2022
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. 2 of 2019 DIFC law
- DIFC Law No. 4 of 2020 DIFC law
- Employment Law DIFC law
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.
- SCT 042/2022 — Langer v Laqueta [2022] DIFC SCT 042 also cites DIFC Law No. 2 of 2019
- SCT 015/2022 — Mahina v (1) Mahfuz (2) Mahendra [2022] DIFC SCT 015 also cites DIFC Law No. 2 of 2019
- SCT 009/2022 — Macias v Madesh [2022] DIFC SCT 009 also cites DIFC Law No. 2 of 2019
- CFI 074/2021 — Maceo v Macbeth Restaurant And Lounge [2021] DIFC CFI 074 also cites DIFC Law No. 2 of 2019
- SCT 311/2021 — Laxman v Lajitti [2021] DIFC SCT 311 also cites DIFC Law No. 2 of 2019
- CA 011/2021 — Musaab Tag Elsir Abdelsalam v Expresso Telecom Group [2021] DIFC CA also cites DIFC Law No. 2 of 2019
Primary source
Everything on this page comes from the decision itself. The link goes to the court that issued it.
Acting on a small claims tribunal matter
This page is a record, not advice. If a matter of your own turns on the kind of question SCT 108/2022 dealt with, speak to us about the facts.