Claim No: CFI 012/2026

IN THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURT

IN THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

BETWEEN

ORORO

Claimant/Respondent

and

ODINA

Defendant/Appellant

ORDER WITH REASONS OF H.E. JUSTICE SIR JEREMY COOKE

UPON the Judgment of H.E. Justice Nassir Al Nasser giving judgment for the Claimant on 25 December 2025 issued in Claim No. SCT-340-2025 (the “SCT Judgment”)

AND UPON the Defendant’s Appeal Notice dated 8 January 2026, filed in SCT-340-2025, seeking permission to appeal the SCT Judgment (the “Permission to Appeal Application”)

AND UPON the Order with Reasons of H.E. Justice Sir Jeremy Cooke dated 28 January 2026, issued in SCT-340-2025, providing a conditional grant of the Permission to Appeal Application (the “Schedule of Reasons”)

AND UPON Claim No. CFI-012-2026 being opened in the Court of First instance to determine the conditional grant of appeal

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The case is remitted to the Small Claims Tribunal for determination under the provisions of Article 21(B) and 17(E)(5) of the Courts Law.

2. Costs shall be reserved to the Small Claims Tribunal.

Issued by:
Hayley Norton
Assistant Registrar
Date of issue: 25 March 2026
At: 12pm

SCHEDULE OF REASONS

1. These reasons use the same terminology as in the decision on permission to appeal.

2. Following the conditional grant of permission to appeal on payment of a specified sum into Court and the payment thereof by the Appellant, the matter is remitted to the SCT to make findings on the matters to which paragraphs 1-5 of the Schedule of Reasons for the conditional grant of permission refer, where no findings were previously made. The grant of permission was given because it could be said that there was an issue of procedural fairness under the Courts Law or a serious procedural error or other irregularity within the meaning of RDC 53.87 in failing properly to consider or analyse the evidence put forward by the Employer.

3. The SCT Judge should examine the evidence as to termination and determine expressly whether it was the Employer or Employee who brought the employment to an end and the date thereof. If the SCT Judge finds that it was the Employer who terminated the employment, then the SCT Judge should make express findings in relation to the allegations made by the Employer as to termination for cause, including those referred to in paragraph 3-5 of the Schedule of Reasons given on permission to appeal.

4. Although paragraph 5 of the Schedule of Reasons referred to a review on appeal of the SCT decision on the basis of the evidence before the SCT, it is preferable for the SCT Judge to determine the issues, rather than the CFI, and to have liberty, if he considers that he should permit the parties to furnish further evidence or submissions, to do so, giving any necessary directions to that effect.