Judgment · Court of Appeal
Musaab Tag Elsir Abdelsalam v Expresso Telecom Group [2021] DIFC CA 011
A reference record of CA 011/2021, 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 | CA 011/2021 |
| Court | DIFC Courts — Court of Appeal |
| Decision | Judgment |
| Date | 20 December 2021 |
| Date of issue | 20 December 2021 |
| Operative orders | 5 |
| Numbered paragraphs | 97 |
| Recitals | 2 |
Parties to CA 011/2021
As the decision names them, with the role each appears in.
| Party | Role |
|---|---|
| Musaab Tag Elsir Abdelsalam | Appellant |
| Expresso Telecom Group | Respondent |
Decisions in CA 011/2021
The DIFC Courts have published 2 decisions under this claim number. The dates and types below are the court's own record of the sequence.
| Date | Type |
|---|---|
| 1 November 2021 | Order |
| 20 December 2021 | 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.
- AED 1,305,502
- AED 1,141,850
Authorities cited in CA 011/2021
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. 6 of 2004 DIFC law
- DIFC Law No. 4 of 2005 DIFC law
- DIFC Law No. 7 of 2005 DIFC law
- DIFC Law No. 3 of 2012 DIFC law
- DIFC Law No. 6 of 2018 DIFC law
- DIFC Law No. 2 of 2019 DIFC law
- Contract Law DIFC law
- Damages And Remedies Law DIFC law
- Employment Law DIFC law
Rules of the DIFC Courts applied
RDC 4.16, RDC 24.1 — 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.
- 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
- SCT 221/2018 — Irelyn v (1) Iakopa (2) Ituha LLP (In Liquidation) [2018] DIFC SCT 2 also cites DIFC Law No. 10 of 2004
- SCT 049/2017 — Haloke v Halil Pjsc [2017] DIFC SCT 049 also cites DIFC Law No. 10 of 2004
- SCT XXXX — Hades Property & Infrastructure Consultants LLC v Hadassah Real Esta 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 appeal matter
This page is a record, not advice. If a matter of your own turns on the kind of question CA 011/2021 dealt with, speak to us about the facts.