Claim No: ARB 039/2025

IN THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS

IN THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

BETWEEN

OKEKE

Claimant/Applicant

and

OBIKE

Defendant/Respondent

ORDER WITH REASONS OF H.E. CHIEF JUSTICE WAYNE MARTIN

UPON the Order with Reasons of H.E. Justice Shamlan Al Sawalehi dated 5 March 2026 (the "Order")

UPON the Order with Reasons of H.E. Justice Shamlan Al Sawalehi dated 20 May 2026 dismissing the Claimant’s Appeal Notice dated 30 March 2026 seeking permission to appeal the Order

AND UPON the Claimant’s Appeal Notice dated 17 June 2026 seeking renewed permission to appeal the Order (the "Renewed Application")

AND UPON the Order with Reasons of H.E. Chief Justice Wayne Martin dated 8 September 2026 (the “September Order”)

AND UPON reviewing the Defendant’s submissions on costs dated 29 September 2026

AND UPON reviewing the Claimant’s submissions on costs dated 29 September 2026

AND UPON the Rules of the DIFC Courts ("RDC")

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The costs to be paid by the Claimant to the Defendant pursuant to the September Order are assessed in the amount of AED 40,000.

2. If the costs are not paid in full within 21 days of the date of this Order, interest will accrue thereafter on the amount of any outstanding balance at the rate of 9% per annum.

Issued By:
Delvin Sumo
Assistant Registrar
Date of issue: 2 November 2026
At: 12pm

1. The Defendant claims the amount of AED 68,922.06 in respect of its costs of opposing the Claimant’s Renewed Application. That amount includes a disbursement and VAT in respect of Counsel's fees in the amount of AED 12,475.56.

2. The Claimant has not filed any submissions challenging the quantum of the costs claimed by the Defendant. However, the Court retains the obligation of assessing whether the costs claimed are proportionate and reasonable.

3. The amount claimed in respect of Counsel's fees is reasonable and should be allowed in full. The hourly rates claimed in respect of the various lawyers engaged in preparing the skeleton argument in opposition to the Renewed Application are also reasonable having regard to the guideline rates published in Registrar’s Direction No. 1 of 2023.

4. However, the amount claimed includes a claim for 29.5 hours of professional work when the only work required was the preparation of a skeleton argument. No doubt counsel had input into that skeleton argument end counsel’s time is of course included within his fees.

5. The Defendant accepts that the Renewed Application did not raise any new issues and effectively repeated the grounds and arguments which had been advanced in the initial application for permission to appeal and to which the Defendant had previously responded.

6. In these circumstances, the time claimed for preparing the skeleton argument is excessive. The hours claimed significantly exceed the times generally claimed by other parties in other cases in relation to the preparation of skeleton arguments responding to renewed applications made on the same grounds as an unsuccessful initial application.

7. Taking all matters into account, the Defendant's costs will be assessed in the amount of AED 40,000 inclusive of disbursements and VAT.