July 16, 2026 Court of First Instance - Orders
Claim No: CFI 008/2026
THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS
IN THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
BETWEEN
PAIGE
Claimant
and
PRESLEY
Defendant
ORDER WITH REASONS OF H.E. JUSTICE ROGER STEWART
UPON a Claim having been filed in the Small Claims Tribunal (the “SCT”) under case reference SCT-344-2025, on 16 May 2025 (the “Claim”)
AND UPON the Judgment of H.E. Justice Maha Al Mheiri dated 15 October 2025 giving judgment for the Defendant in the sum of USD 90,000 and requiring the Claimant to pay the Defendant the Court filing fee of USD 1,800 (the “Judgment”)
AND UPON the Claimant’s Appeal Notice dated 29 October 2025 seeking permission to appeal the Judgment
AND UPON the Order with Reasons of H.E Justice Roger Stewart dated 29 December 2025, granting limited permission to appeal (the “Limited Permission”)
AND UPON Claim No. CFI-008-2026 being opened in the Court of First Instance on 3 February 2026 to determine the Limited Permission
AND UPON the Order with Reasons of H.E. Justice Roger Stewart dated 7 May 2026 allowing the appeal and setting aside the Judgment (the “Order”)
AND UPON the Defendant’s Appeal Notice dated 1 June 2026 seeking to appeal the Order (the “Proposed Appeal”)
AND PURSUANT TO the Rules of the DIFC Courts (“RDC”)
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Proposed Appeal is not permitted pursuant to RDC 44.153.
2. The Proposed Appeal is dismissed.
3. There shall be no order as to costs.
Issued by:
Hayley Norton
Assistant Registrar
Date of issue: 16 July 2026
At: 3pm
SCHEDULE OF REASONS
1. As set out in the Recitals to this Order, the Proposed Appeal is an Appeal against the Order which was, itself, the determination of an Appeal against the Judgment in the SCT.
2. The Order was, accordingly a decision of the Court of First Instance on an appeal.
3. RDC 44.153 under the heading “No Second Appeals” provides “No appeal lies from a decision of the Court of First Instance or the Court of Appeal on an appeal”.
4. It follows that there is no jurisdiction for the Court in respect of the Proposed Appeal.
5. The only route permitted against the final determination of an Appeal is the reopening of a final appeal. However, RDC 44.154 provides that the Court of Appeal or the Court of First Instance will not reopen a final determination of any appeal unless:
(a) It is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice;
(b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and
(c) there is no alternative effective remedy.
6. No application has been made to reopen the Order as a final determination of the appeal against the Judgment. It follows that there is no suggestion either that it is necessary to reopen the Order in order to avoid real injustice or that the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the Order.
