CFI-004/2016 Amlak Finance Pjsc v (1) Mr Daniel George Wallis (2) Difc Registrar Of Real Property

Claim No. 004/2016

THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS

IN THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

BETWEEN

AMLAK FINANCE PJSC

Claimant

and

(1) MR DANIEL GEORGE WALLIS

(2) DIFC REGISTRAR OF REAL PROPERTY

Defendants

DEFAULT JUDGMENT MADE BY JUDICIAL OFFICER NASSIR AL NASSER

UPON the Request for Default Judgment (“Request”) made by the Claimant on 26 October 2017 in accordance with Rule 13.1 (1) and (2) of the Rules of the DIFC Courts (“RDC”), it is found as follows:

1. The request is not one prohibited by RDC 13.3 (1) or (2).
2. The First Defendant has failed to file an Acknowledgment of Service or a Defence to the claim (or any part of the claim) with the DIFC Courts and the relevant time for so doing has expired (RDC 13.4).
3. The Second Defendant has filed an Acknowledgment of Service but has failed to file a Defence and the relevant time for so doing has expired (RDC 13.5(1)).
4. The First Defendant has not: (i) applied to the DIFC Courts to have the Claimant’s statement of case struck out under RDC 4.16; or for immediate judgment under RDC Part 24 (RDC 13.6(1)); (ii) satisfied the whole claim (including any claim for costs) on which the Claimant is seeking judgment; or (iii) filed or served on the Claimant an admission under RDC 15.14 or 15.24 together with a request for time to pay (RDC 13.6(3)).
5. The service was affected on the First Defendant on 20 July 2016 and on the Second Defendant on 3 February 2016.
6. The Claimant has followed the required procedure for obtaining Default Judgment under RDC 13.7 and 13.8.
7. The claim is for a specified sum of money and the request specifies the date by which the whole of the judgment debt is to be paid or the times and rate at which it is to be paid by instalments (RDC 13.9).
8. The request includes a request for interest pursuant to RDC 13.14 and the Claim Form sets out the calculation of interest in the claim.
9. The DIFC Courts are satisfied that the conditions of RDC 13.22 and RDC 13.23 relating to the Defendant being served outside jurisdiction have been met.
10. The Claimant has submitted evidence, as required by RDC 13.24, that (i) the claim is one that the DIFC Courts have power to hear and decide; (ii) no other court has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide the claim; and (iii) the claim has been properly served (RDC 13.22/13.23).

ACCORDINGLY IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

11. The Request is granted.
12. The First Defendant shall pay to the Claimant, within 14 days of this Order, AED 1,065,311.39 (USD 290,275.59) (the “Judgment Sum”), being the difference between the Claimant’s total loss of AED 2,705,311.39 (USD736,139.15) (comprising monthly rental instalments, the unpaid balance of the principal amount and other costs and expenses incurred on account of the Finance Documents) less the value of the Property being AED 1,640,000 (pursuant to the most recent valuation report prepared by Chestertons).
13. The First Defendant shall pay the Claimant interest on the Judgment Sum at the rate of 1% above EIBOR per annum from the date of judgment until payment.
14. The Finance Documents (as defined in the Particulars of Claim) are terminated with effect from 27 September 2015.
15. The First Defendant does not have any interest in the Property with effect from 27 September 2015.
16. The Second Defendant shall deregister any and all interests, and shall cancel any and all caveats in the name of the First Defendant (or otherwise) with respect to the Property from the DIFC Registry of Real Property.
17. The Second Defendant issues a new title deed issued in the name of the Claimant alone.
18. The First Defendant shall pay the Claimant’s costs of AED 183,772.15.

Issued by:

Nassir Al Nasser

Judicial Officer

Date of Issue: 29 October 2017

At: 3pm