DIFC Courts to hear appeal over superyacht

The owner of a $540 million superyacht impounded at Dubai’s Port Rashid during a complex matrimonial dispute will challenge an order to freeze the asset at a DIFC Courts hearing today, raising questions over the exact remit and powers of the emirate’s international commercial court, according to lawyers.

“The matter before DIFC Courts is for the enforcement of an order received from the High Court of England and Wales to collect money against assets in the UAE,” said Amna Al Owais, chief executive and registrar, DIFC Courts. “As such, this is purely an enforcement matter and therefore falls under the DIFC Courts remit.” But a partner at an international law firm in Dubai, who wished to remain anonymous, told The National: “This asset is very clearly located within an onshore jurisdiction.”

Ms Al Owais said for assets located outside of DIFC, “execution by Dubai Courts follows a standard procedure once DIFC Courts has granted an enforcement order”. The hearing is the latest in an ongoing dispute between Russian oil tycoon Farkhad Akhmedov and his exwife, Tatiana Akhmedova.

The High Court in London last month ruled that the 115-metre Luna should be given to Ms Akhmedova to recover a $641m divorce settlement awarded in 2016 and allegedly not received in full.

The English court petitioned DIFC Courts to take control of the yacht and on February 8 it agreed to freeze the asset. But Mr Akhmedov argued DIFC Courts was not the correct jurisdiction to rule over the matter. DIFC Courts upheld the freezing order in a judgment in March, but in April, Mr Akhmedov won the right to appeal today. The claimant is Straight Establishment, a Liechtenstein trust fund and the yacht’s legal owner.

Should DIFC Courts reject the appeal, Straight Establishment is expected to fight the decision on the grounds that DIFC Courts “have no right to enforce any order in favour of Ms Akhmedova since it is not owned by Mr Akhmedov but by a family trust that exists for the benefit of his whole family”, a spokesman for Mr Akhmedov said on Monday. DIFC courts should not have sanctioned the seizure of the yacht in pursuit of a matrimonial claim, the spokesman said.

But Patrick Murphy, shipping litigation partner at international law firm Clyde & Co, said: “It is generally true that the arrest of a ship is only possible in relation to types of maritime claims such as those by suppliers, but DIFC Courts has a broader discretion to freeze assets generally – including moveable property such as yachts – in support of foreign court proceedings, which is exactly what it did [in this case].”