DK Singh

DK Singh is the Managing Partner of KBH. He has over 25 years of experience in top tier multi national firms and leads KBH’s Dispute Resolution, Corporate and Commercial teams.

He has extensive experience of working in the United Kingdom, India and the Middle East and has a reputable client led practice focusing on cross border business ventures and international dispute resolution. He has assisted clients in arbitration centres including London, USA, Singapore, Paris and Dubai. He is also actively engaged in advising companies in the financial services, hospitality, retail, upstream and downstream oil and gas sectors throughout the Middle East, North Africa and CIS countries.

He has been recognised by Chambers Global and Legal 500 as a key figure and a recommended lawyer for the last two years in the field of dispute resolution and employment.

DK Singh regularly contributes articles on arbitration law, mergers and acquisitions and dispute resolution in UAE and India. DK is often relied upon by the clients as a legal and commercial advisor and regularly negotiates contracts and commercial deals on their behalf.

  • Solicitor, Law Society England and Wales
  • Advocate, Bar Council of India
  • Registered Legal Consultant with the Legal Affairs Department of Dubai, Feburary 2012


  • English
  • Hindi
Publications and Contributions: DK Singh has written several articles on arbitration law developments in India and UAE, on Mergers and Acquisitions and Dispute Resolution in UAE and on practical issues in relation to doing cross border business. His articles have been published in reputable journal like Law Business Research and PLC Corporate Magazines.
Notable Representations
Commercial Litigation

These are possession proceedings in the High Court in respect of a residential property held as security under for a facility. The possession action has been staged and the matter has been transferred to the High Court to consider whether the possession action is arbitrable given the guarantee has an arbitration agreement.

A DIFC claim brought by a potential purchaser under a SPA of a Dubai Company. Attended Court on the return date wherein the court had ordered an interim injunction. Raises novel points of the applicability of UAE Law where the SPA has an opt-in DIFC jurisdiction clause.

This claim relates to high net worth individuals within the UAE in relation to recovery of assets and enforcement of orders with concurrent proceedings in the UAE and/or Switzerland, Canada and Jordan.

A DIFC case dealing with complex issues relating to jurisdiction, locus to pursue additional defendants and issue estoppel insofar as the same relief was being claimed in the Dubai Court which may amount to double recovery.

This case led to a landmark decision in the DIFC Courts that established the legal principle that “open contracts” by which purchasers ‘reserved’ property are sufficiently certain as long as they identify the parties, property or interest and the consideration or means for its ascertainment.

It is case which deals with issues in the DIFC such as force majeure, which are usually the premise of the Dubai Laws.

Defending a DIFC freezing injunction and search order on a pro bono basis where the respondent was incarcerated in prison.

This is one of the highest profile match-fixing cases in cricket.

This case was the largest financial mis-selling case in the GCC region and involved complex, cross-jurisdictional issues. It was also the first case in the DIFC in which litigation funding was used.

This case is significant because it set the precedent as to what amounts to “possession and occupation” in the real estate industry.

International Arbitration
  • Representing an ICC Arbitration dealing with issue of contractual interpretation under French Law, application of the French Civil Code and European Agency Law.
  • Representing a DIFC-LCIA Arbitration dealing with issue relating to the notice provisions in the DIFC Real Property Law as well as the cure provisions provided for in Article 80 of the DIFC Contract Law. With this case it’s the first time in the DIFC that Article 80 of the Contract Law is tested.
  • Representing an ICCRA Arbitration dealing with breach under an SPA and the failure by the developer to handover by the anticipated completion date.
  • Representing a claim for damages under a DIAC Arbitration involving breaches arising out of a franchise agreement with a Saudi entity.
  • Representing a claim for damages under a DIAC Arbitration involving breaches arising out of a franchise agreement with a Saudi entity.

Arguing successfully that there should be an order made of security for costs even if the person, the subject of the order is an employee.

This case tests the Court’s application of the discrimination provision in the DIFC Employment Law.

This case tests the issue of what amounts to Confidential Information in the context of a wide raging clause under an employment contract

Representing a claim for damages under a DIAC Arbitration involving breaches arising out of a franchise agreement with a Saudi entity.

DK Singh

Managing Partner - Dubai