Case Studies

Al Doseri Law Wins Ruling in English-Language International Commercial Dispute in Bahrain

In a precedent-setting case, Al Doseri Law, under the leadership of founding partner Saad Al Doseri, has successfully defended its client in an $18 million international commercial dispute conducted in English.

The ruling, delivered by the Court of Cassation on May 9, 2024, marks a significant milestone for Bahrain as it upholds a previous decision by the Bahrain Chamber for Dispute Resolution (BCDR). The first of its kind ruling in Bahrain emphasises the country's growing prominence as a key jurisdiction for international litigation conducted in English and governed by English law.

The case arose from a Ministry of Justice for Islamic Affairs and Waqf (MOJ) resolution permitting the use of English in BCDR disputes when the underlying contract is in English. It also requires that any challenges to such judgments be heard in English at all judicial levels.

In November 2023, the BCDR initially ruled in favour of Al Doseri Law's client. This decision was notable not only for its content but also for being conducted entirely in English. The BCDR's ruling was presided over by Judge Jan Paulsson, along with Judge Nadine Debbas Achkar and Dr Mohamed Abdel Raouf.

The dispute involved a claim exceeding $18 million and was determined to be governed by English law. The BCDR tribunal concluded that the claimant's claims were time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980, which stipulates that actions founded on simple contracts must be brought within six years from the cause of action.

Al Doseri Law successfully argued that their client's communications did not constitute an acknowledgement of liability, thereby not interrupting the statutory limitation period. The Court of Cassation's decision to uphold the BCDR ruling was significant, with the tribunal led by Chief Justice Sheikh Khalid Bin Ali Al Khalifa, assisted by judges Adrian Cole and Michael Grose. The court accepted the appeal in form but dismissed it on merits, ordering the appellant to bear all costs.

Saad Al Doseri commented: “We are delighted to have successfully represented our client in this precedent-setting case. This is an excellent outcome and sets the stage for Bahrain’s commitment to hearing and ruling on complex and high-profile cases in English and governed by English law.”

The success of Al Doseri Law in this landmark case underscores its expertise in handling multi-jurisdictional and international commercial disputes. It also solidifies Bahrain’s position as a leading hub for international commercial disputes, confirming its role as a major judicial jurisdiction for disputes in English and showcasing its commitment to modernising its judicial system in line with global developments in international commercial litigation.

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.


Luxury Watch Theft Case: Defendant Receives Jail Sentence, Ordered to Pay Compensation

In a major legal triumph, the legal team representing the complainant, spearheaded by NYK Law Firm, achieved a significant victory by securing a conviction in a theft case.

This case, adjudicated in the Criminal Court of Dubai, centered on the theft of a high-value luxury watch. The defendant was guilty of exploiting the absence of the property owner to steal the watch during an evening gathering.

Throughout the trial, the complainant's legal team demonstrated exceptional skill and knowledge, meticulously presenting evidence and expert testimonies that convincingly established the defendant's guilt.

NYK Law Firm’s lawyers argued persuasively, underlining the premeditated nature of the theft and the defendant's possession of the stolen item. Their ability to dissect and counter the defendant's arguments was pivotal.

The defense suggested that someone else might have placed the watch in the defendant's bag, but this claim was effectively dismantled by the complainant's legal representatives through strategic questioning and presentation of irrefutable forensic evidence.

The Judgment reflected the rigorous effort and deep legal understanding of the complainant's team, underscoring their role not only in securing justice for their client but also in demonstrating the strength of the legal system.

The defendant was sentenced to imprisonment, deportation and has also reserved the right of the complainant to claim compensation.

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.


Dubai RDC Upholds Landlord Right, Evicting Tenant Who Refused to Vacate

In a noteworthy development within the realm of landlords' property rights, the Dubai Rental Dispute Settlement Centre (RDC) has issued a significant judgment. The ruling establishes a pivotal precedent intended to incentivise landlords, particularly investors in real estate in the country, to play a more active role in their investments.

The case revolved around a rental dispute between a landlord and a tenant, wherein the landlord sought to regain possession of his property successfully.


The landlord leased the property to the tenant on a yearly basis. In compliance with Law No. 26 of 2007 and its amended Law No. 33 of 2008, which regulate the relationship between landlords and tenants in the Emirateof Dubai, the landlord served the tenant with a 12-month legal notice to vacate the apartment, expressing the intention to reclaim it for personal use.

However, upon the expiration of the notice period, the tenant refused to vacate the premises, leading to a dispute. Subsequently, the landlord initiated eviction proceedings against the tenant in the Rental Dispute Settlement Centre (RDC). In the initial court hearing, the judgment was erroneously pronounced in favour of the tenant.

Legal Proceedings

NYK Law Firm contested for the landlord's right to regain possession of his property and pursued an appeal in the Appeal Court (RDC). The landlord's action was in accordance with Article 25(2)(d) of Law No. 33 of 2008, which stipulates that upon the expiration of the lease contract, the landlord may seek eviction of the tenant if the intention is to sell the property.

This provision mandates that the landlord must notify the tenant of the eviction reasons at least 12 months prior to the eviction date, and the notice must be served through a Notary Public or by registered mail. It's worth noting that the landlord fulfilled these conditions.


In the appellate ruling, the Honourable Court delivered a judgment favouring the landlord, thereby instructing the tenant to vacate the property. Additionally, the court directed the tenant to settle all outstanding rental dues up to the date of eviction and to obtain all necessary clearances from authorities such as DEWA and other relevant entities.

The ruling serves to underscore the legal obligation of tenants to fulfill their commitments to landlords in accordance with the terms of the lease agreement and applicable laws. Furthermore, it reaffirms the principle that tenants are responsible for adhering to the terms of their tenancy contracts and for maintaining compliance with regulatory requirements governing the rental of properties.

Through such decisions, the legal system reinforces the importance of upholding contractual obligations and ensuring equitable relationships between landlords and tenants within the framework of the law.


This ruling stands as a significant motivator for landlords to diligently adhere to the laws governing tenancy agreements. By observing legal protocols and fulfilling their obligations, landlords can defend their position should they encounter disputes requiring legal intervention.

Courts are inclined to favour landlords who adhere to such legal requirements, as evidenced by the favourable judgment in this case. Moreover, the ruling sends a clear message to tenants regarding the importance of respecting the rights and responsibilities outlined in their lease agreements.

It serves as a deterrent against the misuse of legal protections afforded to tenants, emphasising the need for tenants to uphold their end of the contractual commitment. By fulfilling their obligations, tenants contribute to fostering a harmonious and equitable rental environment where both parties can confidently rely on the terms of their agreements.

In essence, this ruling not only reinforces the legal framework governing landlord-tenant relationships but also promotes a culture of compliance and mutual respect between both parties. It underscores the vital role of the legal system in safeguarding the rights and interests of landlords and tenants alike, ultimately contributing to the stability and fairness of the rental market.

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.


Dubai Labour Court's Landmark Verdict Exposes Employer Malpractice

In a significant development in the realm of employee rights, the Dubai Labour Court recently delivered a groundbreaking verdict against malpractices by a UAE Real Estate Company. The ruling sets a crucial precedent aimed at curbing the exploitation of employees within the real estate sector.

The case centered on the employment dispute between an Employee and two affiliated Real Estate Brokerage Companies, highlighting the all-too-common issue of employers withholding rightful commissions from their employees. The Hon’ble Labour Court of Dubai's decision not only affirmed the employee's rights but also underscored the importance of upholding the UAE Labour Law.


The Employee was issued an offer letter from Company A, which is a Real Estate Brokerage Company. Company A delayed the execution of the MOHRE Employment Contract for almost 3 months citing reasons that Company B, shall be acquiring Company A very soon. It was represented that Company B shall perform all MOHRE-related compliance to avoid duplicity and to cut expenses.

Both companies agreed to provide a 5% commission on deals closed by the employee. However, just before settling the commission, Company B terminated the employee without notice, denying any affiliation with Company A.

This move, three months post-MOHRE Contract execution, rendered the employee ineligible for entitlements under UAE Labour Law.

During the employee's tenure with both companies, they successfully closed several real estate deals, entitling them to AED 96,000 in total, including end-of-service benefits and accrued commissions.

Legal Proceedings

Represented by NYK Law Firm, the Employee contested the denial of entitlements, citing common employer tactics of transferring employment between affiliated companies to evade payment obligations.

The Hon’ble Court appointed a Management and Accounting Expert to investigate, confirming the validity and continuity of the employment relationship and endorsing the employee's entitlements from the date of joining till termination.


In a landmark judgment, the Hon’ble Court ordered both companies to settle the full claim amount, encompassing commissions and employment entitlements, underscoring the legal responsibility of employers to honour their commitments to employees.


This ruling serves as a wake-up call for employers engaging in similar misconduct, underscoring the urgent need for greater scrutiny and enforcement by employers.

It highlights the vulnerable position of employees and reaffirms the judiciary's commitment to upholding labour rights and holding unscrupulous employers accountable for their actions.

In essence, the Dubai Labour Court's verdict stands as a beacon of hope for employees, signalling a shift towards greater transparency and fairness in the workplace, while simultaneously exposing and condemning the malafide intentions of certain employers.

(The writer is a legal associate at NYK Law Firm, one of the top legal consultants in Dubai)

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.


Glimmer of Hope for BR Shetty; Legal Battle to Continue

While entrepreneur BR Shetty, the founder of NMC Health headquartered in Abu Dhabi, still faces significant legal challenges, the recent ruling of the Karnataka High Court in India, granting conditional permission to travel abroad, represents a crucial milestone in his legal battles, say legal experts.

“The complexities of Shetty’s case revolve around intricate financial disputes, with his companies grappling with substantial loan defaults amounting to billions of rupees. Despite setbacks in the past, this recent court ruling indicates a potential shift in the legal landscape for Shetty, offering a ray of hope amidst ongoing legal proceedings,”said Sunil Ambalavelil, Chairman of Dubai-based NYK Law Firm.

Shetty returned to UAE on Tuesday morning and was welcomed by non-resident Indian expatriates belonging to his home state Karnataka.

Shetty's entrepreneurial journey has been marred by difficulties, including allegations of fraud and financial mismanagement, which led to the downfall of NMC Health. Nevertheless, amidst the legal turmoil, Shetty's contributions to the healthcare sector remain noteworthy, with NMC Health having once been regarded as a paragon of excellence in the industry,” he added.

The Karnataka High Court decision, delivered by Justice Krishna S Dixit, came amidst ongoing legal proceedings related to loan recovery against Shetty.

The court has imposed strict conditions, such as limitations on property transactions and a commitment to fulfil legal obligations in India. Despite these restrictions, the court's recognition of Shetty's citizenship and personal circumstances underscores the humanitarian aspect of this legal battle.

“This legal victory provides Shetty with a glimmer of hope amidst adversity, reflecting resilience in the face of challenges. As he prepares to reunite with his family and continue medical treatment, the path forward remains uncertain, yet imbued with determination and optimism for the future,” commented a senior associate at Kaden Boriss, an international alliance of independent business consulting firms and legal enterprises.

The court last Friday suspended the Lookout Circulars (LOCs) issued by Bank of Baroda and Punjab National Bank and the endorsement issued by the Bureau of Immigration against Shetty and granted conditional permission for him to travel to Abu Dhabi for treatment.

The order was passed by a bench headed by Justice Krishna, who heard the petition filed by Shetty challenging the look-out circular issued against him by the immigration authorities.

“The office memoranda (OMs) on lookout circular (LOC), issued by the Bureau of Immigration of the Ministry of Home Affairs, which also authorises the heads of the public sector banks to issue LOCs, is not valid in the eyes of law,” the High Court of Karnataka said.

“There can be no delegation to any other entity like the Chairman/Managing Director/Chief Executive of public sector banks to issue the LOC,” the court said, while pointing out that Section 21 of the Passports Act, 1967, enables the central government to delegate its power only to any officer subordinate to the central government or to the state government or to an officer subordinate to the state government or to officer of the Indian Consul abroad.

In 2021, the state's high court rejected Shetty's plea against the action of the Bureau of Immigration restraining him from leaving India based on the LOCs issued by two public sector banks to whom his companies owe around Rs28 billion.

Indian immigration authorities, on November 14, 2020, denied him permission to fly to Abu Dhabi from Bengaluru airport based on the LOCs issued by the banks in relation to the default of loans granted to companies promoted by him.

Shetty, whose wealth was estimated by Forbes to be around $4 billion in 2019, is facing a lawsuit in London by administrators of the debt-ridden NMC Health. In July 2023, NMC filed a $4 billion lawsuit against Shetty and its former CEO, Prasanth Manghat, related to allegations of fraud, which led to its fall in 2020. In November 2023, the UK's financial watchdog found that the hospital operator had committed market abuse by understating its debts by as much as $4 billion.

NMC Health, founded in Abu Dhabi in 1974 by Shetty, was a London-listed healthcare operator running hospitals in the Middle East. It entered the FTSE 100 in 2017 after rapid growth and was valued at £8.6 billion at its peak in 2018.

The Karnataka court, while allowing Shetty to go abroad if no other restriction exists for his travel abroad other than these LOCs, has directed him to file an affidavit giving an undertaking not to alienate or meddle with his properties anywhere in the globe, disclosed or undisclosed, and to come back to India whenever needed for legal proceedings, and not to leave the country without the prior permission.

Noticing that the banks have not initiated any criminal proceedings against him so far, the court said: "Shetty should not resist, on any ground, if any proceedings that may be instituted under the provisions of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act of 2018, the Extradition Act, 1962, or such other law, or any extradition/rendition proceedings are taken up abroad."

The court observed that no criminal case is pending against the petitioner. "Therefore, the process of forced recovery will not be carried out. Also, the applicant is an Indian citizen and is eligible to travel abroad. He is 80 years old and needs to stay with his wife and children; he should be allowed to travel to UAE," the bench mentioned in its order.

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.


Get instant updates on the UAE laws and insights on legal and financial matters across the world

Find lawyers, law firms, audit firms, and other experts in the legal and financial sector through TLR

Post your jobs and events through TLR and get more visibility

Subscribe TLR Directory and become a part of a niche community for legal and financial matters.