The Financial Services Regulatory Tribunal has ordered the Dubai Financial Services Authority, the independent regulator for banking, finance and markets at the Dubai International Financial Centre, to recover almost $143,000, or Dh524,810, in legal costs from Al Ramz Capital LLC (Al Ramz) following its challenge to a decision notice issued on 13 June 2024. The ruling marks the first time the authority has sought and been awarded recovery of its internal legal costs in proceedings before the tribunal, and it also reinforces a previous $25,000 fine for what the tribunal found to be an unreasonable challenge.
First award of internal costs to the authority
The tribunal’s costs decision, issued on 24 June 2026, requires Al Ramz to pay around Dh525,000, covering the authority’s external legal costs, all internal costs relating to Al Ramz’s privacy application, and 25% of the internal costs claimed in relation to the main appeal.
In its 3 February 2026 ruling, the tribunal had already upheld the DFSA’s decision to impose a $25,000 fine, equal to Dh91,750, on Al Ramz.
The latest order is significant because it is the first time the authority has recovered its internal legal costs in tribunal litigation. It also reflects the tribunal’s acceptance of the DFSA’s arguments that Al Ramz acted unreasonably in certain respects during the challenge.
Why the tribunal found the challenge unreasonable
The tribunal accepted that Al Ramz did not narrow the issues at an early stage, continued with arguments that had little prospect of success, and raised concerns about suspected market abuse very late in the appeal process rather than at an earlier stage of the authority’s decision-making.
In its reasons on costs, the tribunal said:
«من المُتوقع عادةً أن يُحكم للطرف الفائز بتغطية تكاليفه القانونية الخارجية عندما يكون فائزاً بوضوح في جميع القضايا المطروحة في الطعن».
On the privacy application, the tribunal granted the authority both its external and internal costs in full. The application had sought a closed hearing and requested that the decision notice not be published before the appeal was considered.
Commenting on that point, the tribunal said:
«اتضح للهيئة أن مخاوف مقدّم الطلب (الرمز) كانت تتمحور حول تأثير النشر على سمعته، وقد صاحبها قدر كبير من التكهنات من جانبه.. ومن وجهة نظرنا، كان من المفترض أن يكون واضحاً لمقدم الطلب، الذي استعان بخبرة مستشارين قانونيين متمرسين في هذا الشأن، أن مذكّراته بشأن الخصوصية محكوم عليها بالفشل حتماً، وبالتالي كان من غير المعقول أن يتقدم بطلب الخصوصية على هذا النحو».
DFSA response
Alan Linning, Managing Director of Enforcement at the Dubai Financial Services Authority, said: «وإذ تؤمن السلطة تماماً بحق الشركات والأفراد في الطعن على قراراتها وطلب حماية خصوصيتهم عند الضرورة، فإن هذا القرار يوضح أنه في حال تمسك أحد الأطراف بحجج غير معقولة، أو تقدّمه بحجج يفترض به أن يدرك عدم صحتها، فقد يُطلب منه المساهمة في التكاليف التي تتكبدها السلطة بالإضافة إلى دفع أي غرامات مالية تُفرض عليه».
The authority said the ruling demonstrates both the tribunal’s confidence in its arguments and its ability to defend enforcement decisions effectively. It added that the DFSA remains committed to fair, proportionate and robust enforcement action to preserve the integrity of financial services at DIFC.
Al Ramz may appeal the tribunal’s decision within 28 days of the ruling, but any appeal would be limited to a point of law only.