Stephen Doherty

Stephen has a substantial commercial disputes practice with a strong emphasis on international matters particularly in the Middle East.  He has experience of advising and representing clients before the DIFC and ADGM Courts, and advising on jurisdictional and other issues that arise in the UAE.

He is often instructed to advise and appear in court in a range of other complex contractual and commercial disputes including professional negligence, shareholder disputes and civil fraud. Within his commercial disputes practice, Stephen is often instructed on banking and financial services matters, including in only the second ever successful claim for breach of the Quincecare Duty. He also regularly appears before the Courts in applications for injunctions, summary judgment / strike out, freezing orders, pre-action disclosure, Norwich Pharmacal orders, interim payments, and other forms of interlocutory relief.

Stephen also has experience in regulatory investigations and has been instructed in the high-profile actions brought by the DFSA arising from the collapse of the Abraaj Group. At the Financial Conduct Authority, Stephen was also involved in a high-profile investigation of a retail bank and has advised on numerous issues relating to pensions scams, authorisation of firms, passporting, and the scope of the FCA’s powers under FSMA. He also has experience of a high-profile criminal investigation, conducted by the Serious Fraud Office, into allegations of corruption and bribery against a large UK bank.

Recent Cases

• X v Y [2025] – Representing a crypto investor against a crypto trading platform, in court proceedings seeking interim injunctive relief and associated disclosure orders with respect to the overnight collapse in value of a digital asset.
• Gate Mena DMCC & Huobi Mena FZE v Tabarak Investment Capital Ltd [2024] DEC-002-2024 – High profile retrial arising from the theft of 300 Bitcoin in the context of an over-the-counter cryptocurrency transaction. The claim was brought against the intermediary bank, and the issues at trial included whether Bitcoin was “money” or “currency” for the purposes of issuing an order for payment denominated in crypto assets.
• Kitopi Catering Services LLC v Mons Hospitality FZE [2024] CFI 081 – Representing one of the largest F&B providers in the Middle East defending a c. $3.5 million claim, and in a counterclaim, brought in relation to the provision of catering operations at COP 28, the largest global climate conference held in Dubai Expo City.
• Albulahid & Or v Shehata & Ors [2023] CFI 079 – Shareholder dispute concerning the ownership and control of a Dubai Clusters Free Zone Company, engaged in the development, sale, and distribution of medical software. A legally complex claim that encompasses issues of offshore company law, jurisdictional challenges, international intellectual property law, unfair prejudice, breaches of director duties, and alleged failures to disclose interests in transactions.
• Maasun v Mousi & Ors [2022] DIFC CA 004 – Successful appeal in a $30 million civil fraud case, leading to the substantive claim being dismissed.
• AES Middle East Insurance Broker LLC v GSB Capital Limited [2023] CFI 060 – Claim for conspiracy and inducing breach of contract in connection with a “team move”. Concerns related questions of the former employee’s duties of confidentiality, restrictive covenants and non-solicitation provisions. Stephen also acted in defence of an alleged contempt of court concerning alleged breaches of an interim injunction restraining the use of confidential information.
• Rahamtalla v Expresso Telecom Group [2022] DIFC CA 002 – DIFC Court of Appeal case concerning the application of penalties under the DIFC Employment Law, and limitation periods in the DIFC Court.
• ASW Hospitality AG v MAG of Life FZ LLC – Claim by a group of Swiss hotel management and property consultants against a regional developer, arising from the sale of residential units at the Ritz Carlton Creekside.
• Confidential [2024] DIAC Arbitration – Claim by a customer against a Bank in deceit, misrepresentation, breach of contract and negligence (including Quincecare duties), and regulatory laws.
• GTC Trading SA v Hazem Abdolshahid Mahmoudi Rashed & Anr [2023] DIFC CFI 046 – Enforcement proceedings in which the claimant obtained freezing and charging orders. The principal issue was whether the enforcement action exceeded the jurisdiction conferred on the DIFC Court by Article 7 of the Judicial Authority Law. The case considered the proper boundaries of the DIFC Court’s powers to enforce onshore judgments, as well as the question of the Court’s power to commit for contempt when the question of jurisdiction has not been finally determined, following the decision in Sandra Holding.
• Lakhan v Lamia [2021] DIFC CA 001 – Landmark case before the DIFC Court of Appeal leading to a shift in the interaction between the DIFC Court’s and the Joint Judicial Committee (led by James Counsell KC)
• Aegis v Union Bank of India [2020] DIFC CFI 004 – Successful claim against a bank for breach of the Quincecare Duty, in the context of online phishing fraud. A novel application of the Quincecare Duty to cyber-crime committed by third-parties, and only the second ever successful application of the duty which was established over thirty years ago.
• Mingguo v Sadeghnia [2023] ADGM CFI-021 – Shareholder dispute concerning the control of an ADGM FSRA regulated business. The principal issue that arose was whether the claim was a simple debt claim for payment of sums due for a controlling shareholding in the company, or whether the seller was entitled to rescind the agreement. The issue turned on conflict of laws, and what the governing law of the contract was in circumstances where it provided for disputes to be resolved by the “laws of the UAE”. The case is understood to be the first time the ADGM has adopted the approach of the DIFC Court in Investment Group Private Limited v Standard Chartered Bank [2015] DIFC CA 004, and the recission claim was successfully struck out.
• IGPL General Trading v Hortin Holdings & Ors [2021] DIFC CA 015 – Court of First Instance and Court of Appeal proceedings concerning the application of the Duomatic principle of Company Law in the DIFC courts.
• Kaamil v Kaawa & ors [2020] CFI 032 – Successful application (for the first time) of the rule against reflective loss in the DIFC court, confirming that the rule applies notwithstanding assets being held in complex corporate and trust structures. The case concerns a $30+ million civil fraud dispute.
• Erik Rubingh v Veloqx RSC [2020] ADGMCFI 0006 (ADGM) – An employment dispute in which Stephen obtained judgment for $1 million, that has also raised novel issues in respect of the ADGM’s enforcement procedures that have previously been untested.
• Al Soor Investments LLC & Ors v Julius Baer (Middle East) Limited & Ors [2019] CFI 088 – Proceedings concerning the scope of the DIFC Court’s jurisdiction on an application for pre-action disclosure.
• DFSA v KPMG – Acting as sole counsel in a high-profile regulatory investigation in the DIFC concerning the role of the auditors of the Abraaj Group.
• Acting in a c. £80 million dispute in the UK High Court, including applications for freezing injunctions and disclosure orders at an interlocutory stage.
• Acting in a £2+ million High Court claim for a property developer in a claim brought by an investor, raising issues of breach of contract, unlawful means conspiracy, knowing receipt / dishonest assistance, and fraudulent misrepresentation.
• Advising and drafting pleadings in relation to a contractual dispute relating to the breach of terms of use of an online trading platform.
• Obtaining judgment for £350,000 in a summary judgment application before the High Court. Successfully resisting summary judgment in High Court commercial dispute.
• Advising and drafting pleadings in a £500,000 breach of a supply agreement. Advising in relation to a £250,000 dispute regarding breach of a loan agreement.
• Advising and drafting pleadings in relation to the clawback of commission by an FCA regulated firm in relation to a number of insurance products.
• Advising on a claim for unliquidated damages in a complex international dispute.
• Representing a client in an application for injunctive relief in support of related arbitral proceedings.