SBM Bank (Mauritius) Ltd v (1) Renish Petrochem FZE (2) Mr Hiteshkumar Chinubhai Mehta [2022] DIFC CA 011 (14 October 2022)


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 £5, 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!



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 (1) Renish Petrochem FZE (2) Mr Hiteshkumar Chinubhai Mehta [2022] DIFC CA 011 (14 October 2022)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ae/cases/DIFC/2022/DCA_011.html
Cite as: [2022] DIFC CA 011, [2022] DIFC CA 11

[New search] [Help]


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

October 14, 2022 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

Respondent/Claimant

and

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

Appellants/Defendants


CONSENT ORDER


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

AND UPON the Appellants having filed their submissions in answer to the Draft Order dated 8 September 2022 (the "Response")

AND UPON the Respondent having filed its reply to the Response dated 15 September 2022 (the "Reply")

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

AND UPON the Respondent and the Appellants having agreed to the terms of this Consent Order

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED BY CONSENT THAT:

1. The Response shall be considered as the Appellants' evidence in answer to the Application for the purposes of RDC 23.41(2) and the Appellants shall not be required to file any further evidence.

2. The Reply shall be considered as the Respondent's evidence in reply to the Response for the purposes of RDC 23.41(3) and the Respondent shall not be required to file any further evidence.

3. The DIFC Courts shall proceed to determine the Application.

Issued by:
Delvin Sumo
Assistant Registrar
Date of issue: 14 October 2022
At: 2:30pm


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ae/cases/DIFC/2022/DCA_011.html