Karim is an associate in the Engineering & Construction practice in Dubai. He is a Member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and a Member of the Young ICCA.

Karim has extensive knowledge of ad hoc and institutional arbitration. He also has strong experience in drafting, setting case strategies, and crafting statements of all types. He frequently acts as counsel before several arbitral institutions (ICC, LCIA, DIFC-LCIA, SIAC, and DIAC) under disputes arising from Construction, Oil & Gas, Real-Estate Purchase Agreements, and Commercial Transactions. Karim also advises in pre-dispute matters and negotiations.

In addition, Karim has considerable experience with litigation cases before the UAE courts related to Construction and Real-Estate issues. He serves as a guest lecturer on international arbitration in numerous universities, and is an administrative manager for MetaverseLegal (a decentralized page dedicated to legal implications of the Metaverse).

Prior to joining Hadef & Partners, Karim worked in boutique firms specializing in dispute resolution mainly in the UAE. Karim has also dealt with disputes in Qatar.

Admissions

• Beirut Bar Association

Karim worked in several high complex construction arbitration cases under the auspices of DIAC and DIFC-LCIA (2007 and 2022; and 2016 and 2021 Rules respectively)

• Defending a main contractor against a subcontractor who was contracted for the supply and installation of aluminum cladding for an entire community. The claims included: (i) 25 variation requests; (ii) release of the retention monies; (iii) damages; and (iv) interest. The main contractor filed a counterclaim for delay in completion.
• Representing a main contractor in a mid-stream Oil & Gas case. The main contractor was awarded a tender from a governmental entity for the drilling and installation of an oil and gas pipeline spreading across more than 30 kilometers within the UAE. The claims involved: (i) 5 variation orders; (ii) claims for extension of time; (iii) disruption; (iv) prolongation costs; (v) interest; (vi) recovery of liquidated damages; and (vii) release of the performance bond guarantee.
• Defending a main contractor against a subcontractor who was awarded a tender for the post tensioning works for several towers. The subcontractor’s claims included: (i) 82 variations; (ii) release of outstanding monies under the subcontract; (iii) release of retention monies; and (iv) interest. The main contractor counterclaimed for damages for breach of the subcontract.
• Representing an MEP subcontractor who was awarded a tender for the MEP works for a well-known residential complex in Dubai. The subcontractor’s main heads of claim were: (i) release of certified amounts; (ii) claims for extension of time (iii) 69 variation orders; (iv) retentions; (v) prolongation costs; (vi) disruption costs; (vii) losses arising from termination; (viii) indemnity and subcontractors’ claims; and (ix) claim preparation costs.
• Representing a consultant who entered into a consultancy agreement with multiple contractors, under which, the consultant was tasked to assist the Contractor in procuring several contracts with exclusive clients in addition to closing variation accounts and claims for extensions of time. In return, the consultant would be entitled to a contingency fee. The consultant was successful in assisting the main contractors with 150 projects. However, the contractors defaulted on their payment terms and wrongfully terminated the contract claiming its invalidity ab initio.