Dubai UAE News from the Press Property Market Disaster and More

  • Dubai 7 Stars
  • October 2021
    M T W T F S S
  • Middle East Unrest Update

  • Talk of the Town

    Jo Hopworth on Justice For Natalie – Na…
    Mariam on Criminal Complaint filed in Ge…
    Martin Kraeter on ACI Dubai Funds filed bankrupt…
    Independent Observer on Iranian’s lawsuit reveals roya…
    Rado on DubaiTouristen landen schnell…
    Dubai Citizen on Al Fajer Properties Case…
    Dane on Outlook in concrete- Dubai Wor…
    jamesl fayad on RERA Dubai – Dubai Prope…
    Jacques on Malika Karoum finally arrested…
    James Brown on ACI – Alternative Capita…
    Journalist on Al Fajer Properties-500 Invest…
    ron oakeley on ACI – Alternative Capita…
    Benson Fu on Shahram Zadeh against Al Fajer…
    Monika on RERA – Dubai mulls cance…
    Ali Varahram on Shahram Zadeh against Al Fajer…
  • Top Rated Comments

  • Top Posts

  • RSS Dubai United Arab Emirates Property Real Estate Debt Fraud Developer Investor Court News

    • Criminal Complaint filed against Al Fajer Properties Sheikh Maktoum
      Criminal Complaint filed in Germany against Sheikh Maktoum Hasher Maktoum Juma Al Maktoum CEO of Dubai Developer Al Fajer Properties The Dubai Sheikh who mislead and extort a German Couple  Germany – Dubai 2011 A German elderly couple , today 80 + 50 years old who have been Dubai Tourists since a decade, bought in 2005 an apartment at Nakheel´s Dubai Residen […]
    • UAE: Human Rights Blogger, Sorbonne Lecturer Charged With ‘Humiliating' Officials
      source Human Rights Watch www.hrw.org (Beirut) - The United Arab Emirates attorney general should immediately drop all charges against five pro-democracy activists to halt their trial, Human Rights Watch said today. The charges of "humiliating" top officials relate solely to the defendants' peaceful use of speech to criticize the UAE governmen […]
    • Nakheel Dubai Sunland Case
      June 5, 2011After 21 hearings, Chris O'Donnell, the Australian chief executive of Dubai's major developer, Nakheel, came to the defence of his former colleagues Matthew Joyce and Marcus Lee. Mr Joyce and Mr Lee are accused of profiting from the sale of land that had been earmarked for a colossal high-rise development, which was to include the futur […]
    • Dubai Nakheel CEO decided to leave the company
      Dubai June 7, 2011 Nakheel said on Wednesday that its CEO Chris O'Donnell had left the company "after completing his contract terms". O'Donnell, an Australian who joined the developer in 2006, said he had decided to leave Nakheel following five years spent with the company, the statement added. O'Donnell has overseen a traumatic time […]
    • Owner of Dubai Developer Damac Hussain Sajwani files case against Egypt corruption ruling
      Dubai property developer Damac said on Tuesday it had filed an international arbitration case against Egypt over a land dispute and the conviction of its chairman and owner, Hussain Sajwani.A Cairo court last week sentenced Sajwani in his absence to jail and ordered him to pay a $40.5 million fine in connection with his 2006 purchase of land at Egypt's […]
    • Dubai Palm Jumeriah - Investors plan to take legal action
      Investors in Dubai Palm Jumeirah’s Golden Mile complex will this week serve the developer behind the project with a legal ultimatum to hand over their units or issue them with a refund.Up to ten investors in the luxury complex plan to issue Souq Residences with legal notice in a bid to force a resolution to a dispute that has been ongoing for more than a yea […]
  • Top Rated Posts

    • 490,879 visitors 2010
  • Disclaimer 7 Stars Dubai

    This Website of the Blog 7starsdubai.wordpress.com and 7starsdubai.com content still existing media releases and comments from reputated press and websites only. The content of this Website focus to consumer protection for Investors of the Dubai Property market, the UAE and the Middle East. Press Article from the international Press who report about Fraud in relation with Property Investment and Real Estate Developer Investor Disputes in Dubai and the UAE as well reports from the Press about other criiminal acts and Civil Real Estate cases, Lawsuits before the Court in Dubai, the UAE or other countries. Furtheron we show reports about consumer protection and human rights in the Middle East. Actual Topics about the Unrest in Middle East. The information comprised in this section is not, nor is it held out to be, a solicitation of any person to take any form of investment decision. The content of this site does not constitute advice or a recommendation by us.Communications and should not be relied upon in making (or refraining from making) any decision relating to investments or any other matter. You should consult your own independent financial adviser and obtain professional advice before exercising any investment decisions or choices based on information featured in this Web site. We can not be held liable or responsible in any way for any opinions, suggestions, recommendations or comments made by any of the contributors to the various columns on this Web site nor do opinions of contributors necessarily reflect those of us.In no event shall we be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, direct, special, indirect, consequential, or incidental damages, or damages for lost profits, loss of revenue, or loss of use, arising out of or related to this Web site or the information contained in it, whether such damages arise in contract, negligence, tort, under statute, in equity, at law or otherwise. Comment Rules: Although the administrators and moderators of 7starsdubai.com will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off this Blog, it is impossible for us to review all comments . All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of this Blog, nor the administrator of this Blog will be held responsible for the content of any message, comment. By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws. The adminstrator of this Blog reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any comment (message) for any reason This Blog content still existing media releases and comments from websites only. The information comprised in this section is not, nor is it held out to be, a solicitation of any person to take any form of investment decision. The content of this site does not constitute advice or a recommendation by us.Communications and should not be relied upon in making (or refraining from making) any decision relating to investments or any other matter. You should consult your own independent financial adviser and obtain professional advice before exercising any investment decisions or choices based on information featured in this Blog. We can not be held liable or responsible in any way for any opinions, suggestions, recommendations or comments made by any of the contributors to the various columns on this Web site nor do opinions of contributors necessarily reflect those of us.In no event shall we be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, direct, special, indirect, consequential, or incidental damages, or damages for lost profits, loss of revenue, or loss of use, arising out of or related to this Web site or the information contained in it, whether such damages arise in contract, negligence, tort, under statute, in equity, at law or otherwise. Copyright: The copyright to the text of the blog is held by the author or link as source provided, where applicable. All images displayed are copyright their respective owners and are used either under licence or under the fair use provisions of international copyright law. The information contained in this Web site is for general guidance on matters of interest only. The application and impact of laws can vary widely based on the specific facts involved. Given the changing nature of laws, rules and regulations, and the inherent hazards of electronic communication, there may be delays, omissions or inaccuracies in information contained in this site. Accordingly, the information on this site is provided with the understanding that the authors and publishers are not herein engaged in rendering legal, accounting, tax, or other professional advice and services. As such, it should not be used as a substitute for consultation with professional accounting, tax, legal or other competent advisers. Before making any decision or taking any action, you should consult the administrator of this website. While we have made every attempt to ensure that the information contained in this site has been obtained from reliable sources, 7starsdubai.com is not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. All information in this site is provided "as is", with no guarantee of completeness, accuracy, timeliness or of the results obtained from the use of this information, and without warranty of any kind, express or implied, including, but not limited to warranties of performance, merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. In no event will 7starsdubai its related partnerships or corporations, or the partners, agents or employees thereof be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the information in this site or for any consequential, special or similar damages, even if advised of the possibility of such damages. Certain links in the Web site connect to other sites maintained by third parties that may or may not be presented within a frame on the Web site. 7starsdubai.com has not verified the contents of such third party sites and does not endorse, warrant, promote or recommend any services or products, that may be provided or accessed through them or any person or body which may provide them. 7starsdubai.com has not issued or caused to be issued any advertisements which may appear on these Web sites. We do not review, monitor or endorse any third party web sites linked to Our Site and We are not responsible for the content of any web site linked to Our Site. Your access to any web site that links to Our Site is at your sole risk. We are not responsible for the information, material, products, or services contained on or accessible through such other web sites and will not be liable for any form of loss or damage arising as a result of or in connection with your visits to such web sites. Any links to other web sites are provided merely for the convenience of the users of this Site and the inclusion of these links does not imply an endorsement of the linked web sites or the content therein. In addition, you agree not to link your web site or any other third party web site to Our Site or frame Our Site as part of any other web site without Our express prior written consent. We reserve the right, at any time and for any reason not prohibited by law, to deny permission to anyone to link a web site to, or frame, Our Site. We reserve the right to withdraw Our consent at any time to a link to, or framing of, Our Site at Our sole discretion without notice. Your use of this Site and the operation of these Terms and Conditions shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws and regulations of and applicable in Germany You agree, acknowledge, and submit to the Court in Germany having non-exclusive jurisdiction over all and any dispute or difference between us arising out of or in connection with this Agreement. Please review these Terms and Conditions carefully before using this Site. Your use of this Site indicates your irrevocable agreement to be bound by these Terms and Conditions (as may be amended by Us from time to time). If you do not agree to be bound by these Terms and Conditions please stop accessing and using this Site immediately. Warning: We are aware that several times Cybercriminals mirrowed our Website and posted on several Forums, Website comments by misuse of our email adresses. These Cybercriminals registerd several similar looking Domains and installed several 1:1 mirrowed Websites which look like our Website 7starsdubai. We have already taken the necessary steps by filing criminal complaints against the Individuals behind this Identity theft an Cybercrime, by misusing fraudulently our Blog Identity 7starsdubai. In Search engines like Google, Yahoo, Bling and others you should always take a close view to the links. If this links do not originaly start with www.7starsdubai.com or http://7starsdubai.worpress.com/.... you will end on a faked mirrowed modificated Website. The genral Background of this Cybercriminals is a Stalking and Smear campaign, faking stories for their personal use, to discriminate Persons with the goal to destroy their reputation.
  • RSS ZDF Heute Germany

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Dubai Lawsuits

Criminal Complaint filed in Germany against

Sheikh Maktoum Hasher CEO  of Al Fajer Properties


Property Developer Fraud Dubai

A German elderly couple , today 80 + 50 years old who have been Dubai Tourists since a decade, bought in 2005 an apartment at Nakheel´s Dubai Residential Falcon Tower located on Plot H3 Jumeirah Lake Towers. The completion of this Tower should be  March 2008 but the apartment was never delivered and they end up in a Horror scenario when the development was transferred from Nakheel to DMCC and Al Fajer Properties Dubai  in 2006.

After have been mislead, deprived of their property rights by illegal actions and extortion  ,financial and mental extremely damaged by receiving several threats from Al Fajer Properties since 2008 upon 2009,  a criminal complaint was filed in Germany already in August  2009 against the CEO and President of Al Fajer Properties, Maktoum Hasher Maktoum Juma Al Maktoum. The witness hearings and investigations in Germany are still going on.

Criminal Complaint filed in Germany against Sheikh Maktoum Hasher Maktoum CEO of Al Fajer Properties


In 2006 the Residential development Falcon Tower Jumeirah Lake Towers was transferred from Nakheel to DMCC ( 100% Government) and Al Fajer Properties was named by DMCC as new Developer of the Falcon Tower.
DMCC ensured in writing that the terms of Al Fajer´s purchase was that Al Fajer Properties will developing the Falcon Tower with the same design, same unit specifications and price at which the couple purchased original at Nakheel. It was agreed between Al Fajer Properties to take 1:1 over the once valid contractual obligation – just the completion date will be now in December 2008.
DMCC transferred the 45 % already paid installments paid once by the couple to Nakheel, in 2007 to Al Fajer Properties.

A Financial Statement, hold by the couple, from DMCC and Al Fajer Properties shows this evidently.

The process was accompanied by a lawyer of the couple, the correspondence show evidence that Al Fajer agreed to the named conditions and stept 1:1 in the former contractual obligations.

Left in the illusion everything went fine, Al Fajer Properties start in 2008 to threat the couple to sign and agree to a new contract.

This contract was given to the couple in November 2007 in form of a draft in presence of their lawyer and staff members of Al Fajer Properties. It was a blank document , containing only terms and conditions but not containing any Building constitution, no Apartment specification, no price, and no other relevant declarations. It was a draft with no specification. Within this draft Al Fajer themself was not named as developer, just as seller.  The Tower on Plot H3 was quoted in the Header now as Mixed Use Building ( Residential/Commercial)  and renamed to Jumeirah Business Centre 8.

Several correspondence upon January 2008 sent to Al Fajer Properties to complete the relevant documentation failed. Al Fajer didn`t provide the relevant Documentation.

March 2008 Al Fajer Properties appointed  a new CEO and President, Maktoum Hasher Maktoum Juma Al Maktoum. Starting on March 10, 2008 the couple received threats to deprive them of the property and simply return the amount,unless they did not sign and agree to the incomplete blank draft contract.

After receiving this threats from Al Fajer Properties, the lawyer of the couple ask Al Fajer to refrain from such illegal actions. The actions of Al Fajer have been mentioned to RERA Dubai.

Al Fajer Properties didn`t retrain and repeated in letters upon 31 March 2008 the same threats to the couple.

After this date it remain silent and Al Fajer didn`t react.

A letter wrote by the couple to Al Fajer Properties in June 2008, brought a reaction of Michael Kerr , a lawyer fron Denton Wilde Sapte ,namely instructed to do so by the CEO  Maktoum Hasher Maktoum , showing the  willingness to pay a full compensation based on the damage cause by Al Fajer Properties to the couple. The discussion was about the sum and damage caused by Al Fajer Properties , based upon the event to enable the couple to buy an adequate apartment. The market price of such an apartment was at that time over 2 Million AED.

After several delays of Al Fajer´s lawyer to step in a negotiation, a concrete willingness from Maktoum Hasher Maktoum Juma Al Maktoum to provide a fair compensation was shown in September 2008.

The correspondence was hold in written form via Email between the lawyers.

A clear calculation about the caused damage and the therefrom resulted compensation sum was presented by the couples lawyer. But Maktoum Hasher Maktoum rejected this  and set out a fixed sum, which would have caused the couple still a damage of 600.000 AED.

But finally the so called good will of Maktoum Hasher Maktoum Juma Al Maktoum end up in further threats by Al Fajer Properties upon a statement October 2008, by not taking the now offered amount,  to return only the amount of the once paid 45%. ( 345.000 AED).  Within this letter the couple has also been threatened that they contacted in April 2008 a Journalist by providing  this Journalist their nightmare story , and that  they will  get in further trouble if they made the story public in the future. After this threat Al Fajer Properties choose the way to remain silence.

No more correspondence sent to Al Fajer Properties or their  lawyer were answered by them after January 2009.

Later it was revealed by the couple , over a document provided to a foreign court, that Al Fajer Properties CEO Maktoum Hasher Maktoum Juma Al Maktoum sold on March 31, 2008 the Tower Plot H3 Jumeirah Lake Towers as a 100% Commercial Tower to Dynasty Zarooni . This document confirms, that the acts by Al Fajer Properties in March 2008 against the couple, have been misleading acts, that the was no intention by Al Fajer Properties to build a Residential Tower on Plot H3 or G3.

The Price per sqft within this MOU, agreed between this parties, was 2050 AED. This however was nearly the triple of the price Al Fajer had to deliver the 1098 sqft apartment of the couple,  purchase it for total 775 000 AED and on which was Al Fajer in the contractual obligation to deliver it.

This document in original also revealed that Al Fajer Properties didn`t  intend to develop a Residential Building on Plot H3, nor a Residential Mixed use Building like quoted in their new draft contract on March 2008, the time frame in which the deal with Dynasty Zarooni was already arranged and new Brochures have been already in the printing for a sales promotion of the now  100 % Commercial Tower on Plot H3.

This document uncovered why the couple have been mislead ,been left in the illusion of a now Mixed used Residential Tower. It confirms the reason of the unwillingness from Al Fajer Properties to provide the missing declaration and documentation of the building constitution within the draft contract, to which Al Fajer Properties extorted the couple several times to sign in March 2008 .

Upon today October 2011, Al Fajer Properties is still holding the since 2005 45% paid installments ( 345.000 AED) from the couple and is not showing any positive will to repay this amount nor is Maktoum Hasher Maktoum willing to remember his the once shown will of paying a compensation ( he simulate not rember this – even the correspondence of his Lawyer Michael Kett from Denton Wilde Sapte is existing in written form)

The Tower however on Plot H3 Jumeirah Lake Towers , which was converted by Al Fajer in a Commercial Building in March 2008 ,renamed to Jumeirah Business Centre 8 , sold in March 2008 to Dynasty Zarooni ( here renamed again – now to Eboy and Ivory Towers) , is not completed until today.

From 2010 until 2011 Al Fajer Properties was several times contacted directly via email and over an adress of a Lawyer who presented Maktoum Hasher. Within this correspondence Sheikh MaktoumHasher Maktoum  has been asked several times to pay the outstanding debts to the couple. Upon today Al Fajer Properties resists to do so – they simple do not answer any correspondence.

In a last correspondence hold with an other lawyer of Al Fajer Properties in 2010 it was quoted, that his client, Maktoum Hasher Maktoum cannot remember that the couple had ever claims against him and that he never offered to repay the investments for the purchased accommodation. His further provocation was : ” Can you please send a copy of whatever contract you believe exists between Al Fajer Properties and your clients” ” If you supply evidence to support their assertion losses attributable to Al Fajer, my client ( Maktoum Hasher) will then review it.

The lawyer was after this correspondence informed that a criminal complaint ( by providing him a copy of the complaint) was already filed against his client Makroum Hasher and that  it is extremely remarkable, due to the evident correspondence of March 2008 until October 2008 from other lawyers of Al Fajer,  that his client Maktoum Hasher Maktoum start now in 2010 to simulate  not to be in the acknowledge that there was still a claim against Al Fajer Properties and him and that he cannot remember his acts when he threat them in March and October by saying  just returning a refund of the paid installments to the couple.

Sheikh Maktoum Hasher Maktoum upon today did not answer to further reminders sent to him and Al Fajer Properties in frequent rythm upon today, asking to pay the money back he owe the couple.

He never delivered an apartment for the money nor did he ever build or intended to built the Residential Tower.

Sheikh Maktoum Hasher Maktoum simply put the money of the couple in his pockets for delivery nothing.

He committed a Fraud, mislead the couple ,did not pay back the money once paid by the couple, did not correct the damage he caused over a manner compensation.


Contracts and the Law UAE – Breach of Contract – Compensation

Consideration should be given to whether contracts yet to be entered into should specifically address these issues. But what if the decision is taken not to do so or an existing contract does not address damages? The Civil Code provides an entitlement to compensation for breach of contract even where the contract itself does not provide for such compensation.

Damages under UAE Law 

The purpose of damages is to compensate a party for any loss suffered as a result of default by counterparty to a contract. If damages for a breach of contract are not fixed under a provision of the law or in the contract itself, the Civil Code gives the court discretion to assess compensation “in an amount equivalent to the damage in fact suffered at the time of the occurrence”. The focus here is on the actual loss suffered by a party and gives the court a broad discretion to determine an appropriate award of damages on the basis of the facts and evidence before it. However, how is the ultimate determination made and what limits are imposed on the amount of compensation that may be awarded?

Other provisions of the Civil Code that do not specifically relate to contractual damages may give some guidance as to how compensation may be assessed by a court: “In all cases the compensation shall be assessed on the basis of the amount of harm suffered by the victim, together with loss of profit, provided that it is the natural result of the harmful act”.

The key element of this provision is that a party suffering loss will be compensated for that loss, including any loss of profit, which flows naturally from the default. The explanatory memorandum to the Civil Code says damages are payable in respect of the actual loss suffered as well as loss of expectation (that is loss of an opportunity to obtain a benefit under a contract or to avoid a loss).

Each type of damages claimed will need to be substantiated and shown to result from the breach. Consequential (or indirect) losses will generally only be recoverable where it can be shown that the party causing the loss did so with a malicious intent. While it is important to keep in mind the award of damages is always at the court’s discretion, a specific damages regime in a contract can have the benefit of providing greater certainty as to a party’s right to contractual damages and can assist parties negotiate ways of avoiding recourse to court in this challenging environment.

EX CEO of Nakheel Chris O´ Donnel wins lawsuit in Dubai – Breach of contract by Nakheel

Nakheel former CEO Chris O’Donnell who left Nakheel last June after five years, has won a $3 million claim against the Dubai real estate developer for breach of contract, the Dubai World Tribunal ruled Thursday.

Chris O’Donnell was awarded $ 3 million in bonus compensation in the  judgement.

Judge Anthony Evans made the award at the Dubai World Tribunal held at the DIFC Courts.


Dubai – 26 June 2011

Damac Properties Dubai must pay the Irish couple Noel and Lorna Gaffney compensation for failing to deliver their apartment in Dubai’s Park Towers on time the DIFC Court ruled.

Dubai Property Dispute compensation DIFC Court ruling 2011

Gulf News reported, that the Court also criticised the company for using highly technical arguments and tactics as well as the casual manner in which it had approached the court proceedings — as a result, it ruled that Damac should pay the Gaffney’s Dh200,000 legal fees.

As reported in The National the court awarded the Gaffneys Dh1,781,009 (US$484,872), representing a refund of payments they made towards apartment 602 in Tower B of the development.

The Gaffneys bought their Park Towers apartment off-plan in 2004, according to their original claim. The project consists of two 49-storey cone-like glass buildings and is situated within the grounds of the DIFC, close to the financial district’s central Gate Building.

continue reading….. The National ….. Gulf News

Dubai plans and start to to seize Properties from Off-Plan Investors

Actual Disputes between Investors and Dubai Developers

original published The National – Angela Giuffrida Dubai-  Abu Dhabi 25 April

The Dubai Land Department may begin seizing off-plan properties whose owners are in default.

The authority has started notifying investors who have defaulted that if they fail to make their outstanding payments within two weeks that 40 per cent of any money they have paid so far will be confiscated, and the properties will be sold at auction.

The confiscated money, along with any profits from the auctions, will be handed over to the developers. The rule applies to projects that are 80 per cent or more complete.

The move, according to Mohammed Sultan Thani, the department’s assistant director general, is intended to spur the completion of unfinished projects. “The idea is to see what we can do before the property is cancelled,” he said.

During the property boom, many developers depended on the off-plan model, whereby a property is sold before building work starts to provide finance for construction. Many analysts say the model fuels speculative buying and inflates prices.

A number of developers, including Kuwait’s Al Mazaya Real Estate, which has eight projects in Dubai, have had such cancellation notices issued to investors.

Omar Ramaznouf, a Russian investor who has so far paid Dh10 million (US$2.7m), 60 per cent of the total price, towards 16 office units at Mazaya Business Tower in Jumeirah Lake Towers, recently received one of the Land Department’s notices.

Mr Ramaznouf, who has not made any payments on his development since December 2008, was told in the letter that the developer would be allowed to “sell the related unit[s] by auction in conformity with common regulations, and with the price asked for by the developer in addition to expenses”, unless he paid the next 20 per cent instalment within two weeks.

The final instalment is due when the properties are handed over.

Mr Ramaznouf said he has been unable to pay some instalments because of “cash-flow problems” brought on by the financial crisis. He has been trying to extend his payment plan with Al Mazaya, according to Medhi Guliyev, his business partner.

“But now he’s being told ‘you don’t own this property anymore,’” said Mr Guliyev.

George Ezman, a businessman from the Czech Republic who bought several office units in Jumeirah Business Centre 5, a project by the Dubai developer Al Fajer Properties, has received a similar notice. He has paid 30 per cent of the total cost and is due to pay the remainder on completion.

Mr Ezman complained, however, that the developer breached its agreement by delivering the property more than a year late.

He said that, according to his contract, he had the right to cancel the contract and receive a refund if the property was late.

The building was supposed to be finished in 2008, he said. “I’m not paying any more because the agreement to cancel our contract and get a refund has been ignored. This, along with the fact that they can take our money and keep our property, is insane.”

Spokesmen for Al Mazaya and Al Fajer were unavailable for comment yesterday.

Lawyers working for investors such as Mr Ezman say that while the Land Department can issue cancellation notices, a property agreement can only be officially cancelled by the courts.

Mr Thani said the authority had yet to auction any properties and did not believe there would be many such cases. “Very few people will opt for not completing payments if the building is almost ready.”

Judgement Lothar Hardt vs Damac

Judgment Dubai Lothar Hardt vs Damac

Lawsuit against Damac Properties 2010

original source Emirates Business24-7

Lawyers representing a German investor, Dr Lothar Ludwig Hardt, said the developer allegedly used the money from other property projects to construct Park Towers, the only development that appears to be ongoing out of the five that Hardt had signed up in February 2007.

“These close links show the other four properties are connected to Park Towers… which should have been finished two years ago,” Ludmila Yamalova, legal consultant and partner at Al Sayyah Advocates and Legal Consultants, told Emirates Business. She said Hardt has invested $9.7 million on five properties which, in addition to Park Towers include the two cancelled projects – Lotus Residences and Wildflower; Ocean Heights, which was scheduled for completion eight months ago; and Water’s Edge, where construction hasn’t been started yet.

The German investor is thus demanding refund of $9.7m and is seeking damages and lost profits caused by the developers’ breach of contract and other violations of the UAE, Dubai and DIFC Courts. Yamalova estimates that damages, loss of profits plus all the legal fees could go up to $140m.

“As of today, defendants have not delivered any of the properties and have not complied with any of the contractual obligations to claimants,” a claim form seen by Emirates Business said.

Defendants have committed a series of violations of UAE, Dubai and DIFC Laws in connection with properties such as enticement and unfairness, illegal sale, failure to obtain necessary approvals, failure to commence construction timely, failure to timely register developer and obtain necessary license, mismanagement of escrow funds and violation of trust account regulations, unfair contracts of adhesion, fraud and deception… illegal competition, bribery, trickery, breach of trust, cheating in commercial transactions, money laundering and accomplice liability,” said the claim form.

…..continue reading


Dubai property developers and a real estate promoter have been ordered to repay Dh1.77 million

source GulfNews

Two property developers and a real estate promoter have been ordered to repay Dh1.77 million paid in by a couple for a 26th-floor-flat overlooking Dubai’s Business Bay.

The Dubai Real Estate Court ordered the Dubai-based promoter and property developers to repay the couple, a businessman and his wife, Dh1.77 million which they had deposited as a first instalment for the flat in a high-rise tower project.

Lawyer Dr Habib Al Mulla, of Habib Al Mulla and Co Advocates and Legal Consultants, who represents the couple, lodged the civil lawsuit against the defendants after they refused to collect the remaining instalments and write a contract then deliver the flat.

Presiding Judge Shehab Ahmad Al Shehi also ordered the defendants to pay the above-mentioned amount plus nine per cent legal interest.

Dr Al Mulla argued in his lawsuit that his clients purchased the flat for Dh17.7 million, out of the first payment was made to the promoter. “They collected a receipt for the first instalment. When the second instalment was due, the promoter asked my clients to pay it for the sake of one of the property developers based in Dubai.”

Dr Al Mulla said since the deal was made, it was his clients’ first encounter with the Dubai-based property developer.

“The claimants asked the promoter why should they pay the second payment to the Dubai-based developer before, they later agreed to pay & surprisingly, the promoter informed my clients that they stopped receiving payments for that project,” he continued.

He said his clients were asked to follow up with the Dubai-based developer and a Kuwait-based developer.

The Dubai-based developer met with the claimants and informed them that there were no problems and they would be collecting their contract within a week, according to the lawsuit.

“Since then, the plaintiffs had been avoiding the claimants, refused to collect any instalments and didn’t process the contract. Since my clients didn’t get the flat, the price of which tripled after sometime, they lodged this lawsuit and claimed Dh1.77 million plus Dh500,000 in financial and moral compensation for the damages they incurred by the plaintiffs’ act,” argued Dr Al Mulla.

Presiding Judge Al Shehi further ordered the plaintiffs to pay Dh3,000 in lawyers’ fees. The primary verdict is still subject to appeal.


source The National by Angela Giuffrida

Dubai, January 2010

German investor Lothar Hardt is suing Damac Properties for alleged breach of contract in what could be the largest lawsuit taken by an individual against a Dubai developer.

Lothar Hardt has filed his case against one of the region’s biggest developers and four of its executives at the Dubai International Financial Centre Courts.

Mr Hardt claims to have invested US$9.7 million (Dh35.6m) across five of Damac’s developments in Dubai, including one building on land he says is owned by the UN.

The dispute relates to a series of off-plan investments made since 2006 in projects including: Park Towers at DIFC; Water’s Edge and Lotus Residences at Business Bay; Wildflower at Jumeirah Golf Estates; and Ocean Heights at Dubai Marina.

Mr Hardt alleges the developer failed to deliver the projects on time, mismanaged escrow accounts relating to some of the projects and did not register the transactions with Dubai’s Land Department, court documents show.

Damac is also accused of selling property in Water’s Edge, Lotus Residences and Wildflower to Mr Hardt without owning the land or obtaining construction permits.

The land on which Lotus Residences is planned is owned by the UN, the court documents claim.

Mr Hardt, considered one of Damac’s “VIP investors”, is also suing for additional loss of income after he claimed to have signed agreements with retail outlets that were going to rent the commercial units he bought from Damac.

“Through my experience with Damac I have been very frustrated,” he said. “I think this has to be fought in public. When I pursue something, I will really pursue it until the end. This is a young country but I’m confident in the new laws here.”

Now Mr Hardt is demanding a refund of the $9.7m he has invested in Damac projects, in addition to damages and lost profits.

Damac has acknowledged the case against it and four of its executives: Hussain Sajwani, the company chairman; Faisal Sajwani; Sofyan Khatib; and Peter Riddoch, a former chief executive.

But the company is contesting that the case be heard at DIFC, where it is registered and where one of the projects, Park Towers, is located.

It has until February 4 to declare its reasons for contesting the DIFC’s jurisdiction, which follows English common law and, unlike the main Dubai courts system, allows foreign lawyers to represent clients and cases to be heard in English.

Damac declined to comment yesterday.

If all or part of the case takes place at DIFC, it will be the first major dispute against a property developer to be heard at the court since it was set up in 2004, said Ludmila Yamalova, a partner at Al Sayyah Advocates and Legal Consultants, which is pursuing the case on behalf of Mr Hardt.

“We think at least part of the case has to be heard at DIFC, such as the part that relates to projects located there, like Park Towers,” said Ms Yamalova. “Damac is also a DIFC-registered entity.”

If Damac’s bid to have the case heard elsewhere is granted, then the rest of the dispute would have to go through the main Dubai courts system, which is more costly for complainants as they have to pay separately for each contract dispute, rather than take a class action.

“Right now, investors think there is no justice or no recourse, but at DIFC we do have a world-class institution that can deal with these issues at an international level … this is what DIFC has aimed to represent,” added Ms Yamalova.

“If DIFC steps up to the plate and starts looking at these cases, it will give people confidence.”

Read also……from The National …Legislation lifts investor outlook

original source 7Days Dubai

DAMAC Properties has filed a motion to stop an investor’s lawsuit being heard in the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) courts, and has also moved to strike the case entirely, the lawyer for the investor told 7DAYS yesterday.

German investor Lothar Hardt, who has invested in around dhs100 million worth of properties from Damac, filed a suit against the firm in December with the DIFC Courts, alleging breaches of contracts in the form of delays, misrepresentation of properties, fraud and improper use of funds, among other claims.

Hardt has invested in Lotus Residences and Water’s Edge in Business Bay, Park Towers at DIFC, Wildflower in Jumeirah Golf Estates and Ocean Heights in Dubai Marina.

He filed the suit with the DIFC Courts because Park Towers is located at DIFC and Damac is a DIFC-listed company.

Ludmila Yamalova, a partner at Al Sayyah Advocates and Legal Consultants, which is handling the suit, previously told 7DAYS that having the case heard at the DIFC Courts has a number of advantages over the Dubai Courts, including the fact that DIFC operates under British law, which has had more experience of property disputes in comparison with Dubai law.

Yamalova said yesterday that Damac was contesting the jurisdiction of the case and was also moving to strike out the case due to a lack of “reasonable grounds”.

However, she said Hardt had filed five motions in response to Damac, including a motion for judgement by default and an award of damages of over $132 million because Damac failed to support its motion with proper statements and failed to file its defence, and defences for individuals named in the case, on time.

The requested damages include actual damages of about $44 million  in lost profits and legal expenses, and punitive damages, which can be  up to three times the value of actual damages in the DIFC Courts.

The motions of both Hardte and Damac will be heard at DIFC Courts later this month.

Hardt told 7DAYS in January that if DIFC Courts decided jurisdiction belonged with the Dubai Courts, he would still pursue the suit.

“First I am hoping that I will regain my money and the second thing is, while I have been negotiating with Damac I’ve seen so many people in the situation where all the money they had was in one apartment and they stand to lose it all… so I see myself also as being the spearhead for these people,” he said.

Read also: An interesting case to watch – German Investor is suing Damac Properties

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: