Judgments

Search
Judges
The Lord Faulks KC
Summary
This case concerned an application before the AIFC Court to recognize and enforce an arbitral award issued by the International Arbitration Centre (IAC) in a construction dispute arising from a contract for design, construction, and equipment supply works. The arbitral tribunal largely upheld the defendant’s counterclaim, ordering the claimant to reimburse substantial advance payments for unperformed works and undelivered equipment, as well as various project-related expenses and defect-correction costs, while rejecting claims for contractual penalties, fines, and certain legal expenses. The AIFC Court found the award valid and justified, recognized and enforced it, and granted the claimants 14 days to apply to set aside the enforcement order.
AQUA FACTORIA LLP v AOM SDF I B.V. PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY
CASE No: AIFC-C/CFI/2024/0001
22.05.2024
Judges
Thomas Montagu-Smith KC
Summary
This case concerned an application by the borrower to set aside an arbitral award issued by the International Arbitration Centre (IAC) of the AIFC, which had ordered the borrower to pay accrued loan interest of KZT 242.8 million. The claimant argued that the arbitrator based the award on a factual finding not advanced by either party, namely that the parties had agreed to reduce the loan amount, and therefore exceeded the scope of the arbitration. The AIFC Court dismissed the claim, holding that the arbitrator’s reasoning was within the scope of the issues submitted to arbitration, that the claimant was effectively challenging the merits of the award rather than a procedural defect, and therefore the award remained enforceable.
Judges
The Lord Faulks KC
Summary
Private Company iKapitalist Ltd applied to the AIFC Court for recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award issued in IAC Arbitration Case No. 39/2023 concerning unpaid debt and related financial obligations owed by ABN Alyans LLP and two individual guarantors. After reviewing the arbitral award, the Court found the application justified and ordered the defendants jointly and severally to pay the outstanding debt, contractual penalties, legal representation costs, and the arbitrator’s fees. The Court granted enforcement of the award while allowing the defendants 14 days to apply to set aside the enforcement order.
FREEDOM FINANCE JSC v Mr. EGOR ROMANYUK
CASE No: AIFC-C/CA/2024/0002
03.05.2024
Judges
The Lord Faulks KC
Summary
The claimant sought permission to appeal an AIFC Court judgment that awarded USD 100,000 for the defendant’s breach of a settlement agreement through disparaging social media posts, arguing that USD 5,000,000 should have been awarded instead. The claimant contended that the trial judge improperly reduced the contractual penalty under Article 297 of the Civil Code and incorrectly approached the burden of proof regarding losses. The AIFC Court refused permission to appeal, finding that the judge had properly exercised his discretion, that the appeal had no real prospect of success, and that the judgment did not create a binding precedent.
Judges
Andrew Spink KC
Summary
Commercial Properties Ltd applied to the AIFC Court for approval of a corporate restructuring involving the merger of Dostyk Plaza Limited Liability Partnership and Shymkent Plaza Limited Liability Partnership into the claimant company. The court found that the sole owner of all entities had approved the merger, creditors had been notified, assets and liabilities were adequately protected, and the arrangement satisfied the requirements of the AIFC Companies Regulations. The court sanctioned the arrangement under Sections 124 and 126 of the AIFC Companies Regulations and ordered the merger to proceed according to the Agreement on Merger dated 16 January 2024.
Judges
Josephine Higgs KC
Summary
Ms. Aisulu Omarova and Mr. Altai Omarov sued NEF Qazaqstan LLP and Timur Gayrimenkul Geliştirme Yapi ve Yatirim A.Ş. in the AIFC Small Claims Court seeking repayment of matured bonds, penalties, and costs after the issuer failed to redeem bonds and pay amounts due on maturity. The court found that the issuer admitted its repayment obligation, upheld the contractual penalty provisions under AIFC law, and ruled that the guarantor was jointly and severally liable under the guarantee agreement. Judgment was entered in favor of the claimants, ordering both defendants to pay KZT 10,285,537.83 to the first claimant and KZT 5,142,768.91 to the second claimant within 28 days.