SBM Bank (Mauritius) Ltd v Renish Petrochem FZE (2) Mr Hiteshkumar Chinubhai Mehta [2023] DIFC CA 011 (06 February 2023)


BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!

Thank you very much for your support!


BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

The Dubai International Financial Centre


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> The Dubai International Financial Centre >> SBM Bank (Mauritius) Ltd v Renish Petrochem FZE (2) Mr Hiteshkumar Chinubhai Mehta [2023] DIFC CA 011 (06 February 2023)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ae/cases/DIFC/2023/DCA_011.html
Cite as: [2023] DIFC CA 011, [2023] DIFC CA 11

[New search] [Help]


CA 011/2022 SBM Bank (Mauritius) Ltd v (1) Renish Petrochem FZE (2) Mr Hiteshkumar Chinubhai Mehta

February 06, 2023 Court of Appeal - Orders

Claim No: CA 011/2022

THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

BETWEEN

SBM BANK (MAURITIUS) LTD

Claimant/Respondent

and

(1) RENISH PETROCHEM FZE
(2) MR HITESHKUMAR CHINUBHAI MEHTA

Defendants/Appellants


ORDER OF CHIEF JUSTICE ZAKI AZMI


UPON the application filed by the Respondent dated 25 August 2022 by way of a Draft Order (the “Draft Order”)

AND UPON the Respondent having re-filed the Draft Order by way of Application No. CA-011-2022/2 dated 12 October 2022 as directed by the Registry (the “EOT Application”)

AND UPON reviewing the Consent Order dated 14 October

AND UPON reviewing the Appellants’ submissions in answer to the Draft Order dated 8 September 2022 (the "Response")

AND UPON reviewing the Respondent’s reply to the Response dated 15 September 2022 (the "Reply")

AND UPON the Order of Chief Justice Zaki Azmi dated 18 August 2022 granting the Appellants permission to appeal on the condition that the Appellants pay security for costs

AND UPON reviewing all the relevant Court file

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The EOT Application is granted.

2. The deadline for the Respondent to file its Respondent’s Notice (including application for permission to cross-appeal) pursuant to RDC 44.75 and 44.79 shall be extended to 28 days after the date on which security for costs is paid into Court by the Appellants.

3. The deadline for the Respondent to file its Skeleton Argument for the appeal pursuant to RDC 44.84 shall be extended to 21 days after the date on which the Respondent has filed its Respondent's Notice.

4. There shall be no order as to costs.

Issued by:
Delvin Sumo
Assistant Registrar
Date of issue: 6 February 2023
At: 11:30am


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ae/cases/DIFC/2023/DCA_011.html