Date:

11/02/2026

Name of listed company

Al Mazaya Holding Co. K.S.C. P

Automated Lawsuit number Lawsuit Number

1441/2023 Commercial (Dubai Court of First Instance)
565/2025 Commercial Appeal

Subject of the Lawsuit

A subsidiary to Al Mazaya Holding Company in the Emirate of Dubai filed a lawsuit against a contracting company and its owners, subcontractors, and a consulting office and its owners (as a precautionary measure in order to avoid the Statute of Limitation related to filing a lawsuit), demanding to oblige them jointly to bear the budgeted costs of rectifying the defects and repairing some buildings in the Emirate of Dubai that they had previously developed for the benefit of the subsidiary, due to their responsibility for the development execution work and supervising the development execution of those buildings for the benefit of the subsidiary as some defects that require repairs had appeared according to the reports of relevant authorities in the Emirate of Dubai, where the subsidiary requests the following:
Obliging the defendants, from the first to the seventh jointly to pay an amount of AED 82,022,600 (equivalent to approximately KD 6.9 million) and legal interest at the rate of 5% from the claim date till full settlement, which represents the estimated budget for the repair cost of the subject buildings.
Obliging the defendants from the eighth to the eleventh jointly with the defendants from the first to the seventh to pay an amount of AED 23,200,000 (equivalent to approximately KD 1.9 million) and legal interest at the rate of 5% from the claim date till full settlement, which represents part of the main claim mentioned in the previous clause and includes the estimated budget for the repair cost of the subject buildings.
Reserving the right to request compensation after assessing the damages and losses
Obliging the defendants to pay the related fees, expenses, and attorney’s fees.

Subsequently, the subsidiary amended its requests in that lawsuit by claiming an additional AED 40,000,000 (equivalent to approximately KD 3.3 million) as punitive damages.
The subsidiary also filed a standby claim – in case of non-ruling for the budgeted costs – to request the ruling for the amounts actually incurred for the repair works during the full span of this lawsuit to avoid the possibility of rejecting the full claimed amount by the court as the full repair costs may not become fully due for payment before issuing the final verdict.

The Court Judgement / Verdict date

11/02/2026

The name of the Court / Court circuit that issued the Judgement / Verdict

Court of Appeal

Parties of the Lawsuit

Al Mazaya Real Estate FZ L.L.C (plaintiff) (Appellant)
against
Al Sarh Contracting Company and others (defendants) (Respondents)

The Judgment / Verdict in favor of

Appellant – Al Mazaya Real Estate FZ L.L.C

Appellant – Al Mazaya Real Estate FZ L.L.C

The court ruled in the presence of the defendants from the first to the fourth and from the eighth to the last, as well as for the remaining defendants as if they are present as follows:

First: The court ruled not to accept the inclusion of Amal Daniel, Patrick Daniel, and Melanie Daniel (heirs of the fifth defendant) as parties to the lawsuit, and ordered the plaintiff to bear the costs of their inclusion.

Second: The court accepted the inclusion of both “EForce Engineering Consultancy” and Salem Rashid Salem Al-Khidr Al-Shamsi in his capacity as the judicial liquidator of Al-Sarh Contracting LLC (the sixth defendant) as a matter of form.

Third: The court rejected the lawsuit against the defendants from the second to the fourth due to the lawsuit being filed by a party without proper standing.

Fourth: The court rejected the lawsuit against the first defendant due to the existence of an arbitration clause.

Fifth: The court ordered the included party, Salem Rashid Salem Al-Khidr Al-Shamsi, in his capacity as the judicial liquidator of Al-Sarh Contracting LLC (the sixth defendant), to pay the plaintiff the amount of AED 27,598,079 (Twenty seven million, five hundred ninety-eight thousand, seventy-nine Emirati Dirhams) equivalent to approximately KD 2.3 million as compensation and punitive damages from the funds of the sixth defendant company, along with a legal interest of 5% annually from the date this ruling becomes final until full payment.

Sixth: The court rejected the lawsuit against the defendants from the seventh to the last.

Seventh: The court rejected the inclusion of “EForce Engineering Consultancy” and ordered the plaintiff to bear the costs of their inclusion.

Eighth: The court ordered Salem Rashid Salem Al-Khidr Al-Shamsi, in his capacity as the judicial liquidator of Al-Sarh Contracting LLC (the sixth defendant), to bear the costs of the lawsuit and to pay an amount of AED 1,000 for legal fees from the funds of the sixth defendant company and rejected all other requests.

Court of Appeal Judgment / Verdict

Court Judgment:
Regarding the appeal, the court ruled to revoke the appealed judgment insofar as it dismissed the case against the first respondent due to the existence of an arbitration clause, and for being filed against parties lacking standing with respect to the second to fourth respondents and the heirs of the fifth respondent.

The court ordered the first and sixth respondents jointly to pay the appellant an amount of AED 27,598,079.06.

The court further ordered the second to fourth respondents and the heirs of the fifth respondent (respondents 13, 14, and 15) to pay the remaining balance of the adjudged amount should the assets of the first respondent be insufficient to cover it, each according to their share in its losses.

The respondents are also ordered to pay legal interest at a rate of 5% from the date of the judicial claim until full settlement, as well as the court fees, expenses, and an amount of AED 1,000 as attorney’s fees, with the security deposit to be forfeited.

Court of Cassation Judgment / Verdict

There is no current judgment

The expected financial impact on the company as a result of the Judgment / Verdict

There is no current financial impact on the company, as the subsidiary will recognize profits against the judged amounts in its financial statements upon the actual receipt of those amounts by the subsidiary