Marcos v Miller [2022] DIFC SCT 001

February 04, 2022 SCT - JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS

Claim No: SCT 001/2022

THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS

In the name of His Highness Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Ruler of Dubai

IN THE SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL OF DIFC COURTS
BEFORE H.E. JUSTICE NASSIR AL NASSER

BETWEEN

MARCOS

Claimant

and

MILLER

Defendant

---

Hearing :	27 January 2022
Judgment :	4 February 2022

---

JUDGMENT OF H.E. JUSTICE NASSIR AL NASSER

---

UPON a Hearing having been listed before H.E Justice Nassir Al Nasser on 27 January 2022, with the Claimant’s and the Defendant’s representatives in attendance

AND UPON reading the submissions and evidence filed and recorded on the Court file

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The Defendant shall pay the Claimant the sum of AED 178,406.20.

2. The Defendant shall pay the Claimant the Court fee in the sum of AED 8,920.31.

3. The Defendant’s counterclaim shall be dismissed.

4. Each party shall bear its own costs in relation to the Counterclaim.

Issued by:
Nassir Al Nasser
SCT Registrar
Date of Issue: 4 February 2022
At: 11am

THE REASONS

Parties

1. The Claimant is Marcos(the “Claimant”), a company registered in the DIFC, located in Suite 111, Dubai International Financial Centre, Dubai, UAE.

2. The Defendant is Miller (the “Defendant”), a Public Listed Company registered and located in Dubai, UAE.

Background and Procedural History

3. The underlying dispute arises over a recruitment agreement (the “Agreement”) signed by the Claimant and the Defendant on 18 October 2020.

4. On 3 January 2022, the Claimant filed a claim with the DIFC Courts’ Small Claims Tribunal seeking payment in the sum of AED 178,406.20 from the Defendant, being the balance of the unpaid invoices arising out of the Agreement.

5. On 10 January 2022, the Defendants filed an Acknowledgment of Service with the intention to defend the whole claim.

6. The parties met for a Consultation with SCT Judge Hayley Norton on 12 January 2022 but were unable to reach a settlement.

7. In line with the rules and procedures of the SCT, this matter was referred to me for determination, pursuant to a Hearing held on 27 January 2022, at which the Claimant’s and the Defendant’s representatives were in attendance.

Claim

8. The Claimant submits that pursuant to the Agreement, it was agreed that the Claimant would provide specific services to the Defendant regarding the recruitment of the group chief marketing officer in the UAE, and the Defendant would pay for such services in accordance with the Agreement.

9. The Claimant submits that the Defendant failed to pay the total sum of AED 160,570.20 for invoices 1094 and 1210 (the “Invoices”), plus the sum of AED 17,836 as contractual interest on the aforesaid amount at the rate of 1% per month from the date of the invoices until the date of payment.

Defence

10. The Defendant, in response, submitted that the Agreement between the parties is a one-sided Agreement, the terms of which require the Defendant to pay professional fees to the Claimant regardless of the services performed and the results achieved by the Claimant.

11. The Defendant submits that the Claimant shortlisted candidates and made its recommendation. However, the candidate that was selected for the position was not in fact suitable for the role and did not satisfy the profile that the Defendant was seeking. Nevertheless, due to the urgency of filling the position and relying on the recommendation of