Dublin High Court dismisses Muslim Brotherhood claims, affirms UAE's integrity

A Dublin court has issued a decisive ruling in a case relating to an administrative dispute at the Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland (ICC), bringing seven months of contentious litigation to a close.

The case was brought by Abdelbaset Elsayed of the Muslim Brotherhood and stemmed from disagreements over the management of the Al Maktoum Foundation.

During a court hearing, Judge David Nolan explained that the withdrawal of the lawsuit meant the dismissal of all claims made by the plaintiff against the foundation's directors, resulting in the decision to dismiss the case.

He added that the case file lacked a key legal document required to initiate proceedings in the High Court.

The court ordered Abdelbaset Elsayed to cover all legal costs and to compensate the community for damages resulting from the closure and disruption to activities.

The final amount of compensation will be determined at a hearing on 13 January 2026. This will include legal and court fees, as well as compensation for damages to the community resulting from the falsification and fabrication of accusations that led to the centre's closure.

These developments have resulted in the current administration being cleared of the charges against it.

By contrast, the court commended the Al Maktoum Foundation for its patience and commitment to serving the community, despite the controversy surrounding the case.

The court also recognised the UAE's humanitarian and developmental efforts through the Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum Humanitarian and Charity Establishment.

These efforts are based on institutional work and social responsibility, far removed from slogans or narrow interests.

The lawsuit was filed in May following an administrative dispute that led to the closure of the centre's mosque in the Clonskigha area of South Dublin.

Abdelbaset Elsayed, who claimed to have held a managerial position within the organisation since 2012, alleged that the appointment of several new board members was illegal, thereby exacerbating the dispute.

During the hearing, the court deemed the defence to be 'weak and lacking sufficient legal basis', asserting that the case lacked the necessary legal support.

Consequently, the plaintiff withdrew from the case and was ordered to pay all legal costs.