United Arab Emirates

The “local” or “onshore” courts of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have three levels:

• the Court of First Instance (federal and local);
• the Court of Appeal (federal and local); and
• the Courts of Cassation at the local level of the Emirates which have independent judicial departments and the Federal Supreme Court (at the federal level and at the local level for Emirates which do not have independent judicial departments).

In addition, two common law courts operate within the UAE financial free zones; the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM) courts, established by way of Abu Dhabi Law No. 4 of 2013, as amended by Law No. 12 of 2020 (the “Founding Law”) and the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) courts, established under Federal Decree No.35 of 2004 and Dubai Law No.12 of 2004 as amended and now superseded by Dubai Law No.2 of 2025 (the “Court Law”). Both the ADGM and the DIFC have financial, administrative and judicial independence as well as independent legal and regulatory frameworks. Both have two levels of court; a Court of First Instance and a Court of Appeal (each jurisdiction also operates a small claim division).

Federal Decree-Law No. 42/2022 on the Promulgation of the Civil Procedure Law (the “Civil Procedure Law”) sets out the procedural requirements which apply to each stage of the litigation process in the local courts.

The ADGM and DIFC courts operate their own procedural rules which are modelled on the English Civil Procedure Rules; these are the ADGM Court Procedure Rules and the Rules of the DIFC Courts, respectively.

For commercial disputes, there are no specified pre-action protocols in the UAE courts; however similar pre-action considerations are applicable in the UAE, as they are in other jurisdictions. A claimant should ensure that the identity of the intended defendant is correct, check that the court has jurisdiction to hear the dispute and also the appropriate court fees, and check any limitation concerns (as set out in the applicable law such as the Civil Code or Commercial Code in onshore UAE or the relevant ADGM or DIFC laws).

In the local UAE courts, a legal representative must obtain a notarised power of attorney in order to represent their client.

Mediation and conciliation are governed by Federal Decree-Law No. 40/2023 on Mediation and Conciliation in Civil and Commercial Disputes (known as the “Mediation and Conciliation Law”). This law has consolidated the mediation and conciliation frameworks at the federal level in the UAE. At a local level, court-annexed mediation and conciliation centres have also been established in Abu Dhabi and Dubai, and are governed by separate local laws and resolutions.

Mediation may be voluntary or court-mandated, but will still be non-binding unless a settlement is reached by the parties.

In contrast, conciliation is an alternative yet mandatory process for the resolution of specific categories of disputes such as those outlined in Article 27 of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Law (e.g. disputes valued at AED 5,000,000 or less) and Article 5 of Dubai Law no. 18 of 2021.

The ADGM and DIFC also provide for mediation, which is usually voluntary, but under their respective procedural rules both courts have a discretion to refer disputes to mediation if the court considers it appropriate. Both courts also operate mediation centres to support parties in dispute.

Proceedings in the local UAE courts follow an inquisitorial civil law system with short, administrative hearings to allow parties to submit written memoranda which are then addressed by the other party at the next hearing. Each hearing is usually set two to three weeks apart and there can be as many hearings as a judge believes necessary for each party to have adequately stated their position. If the court appoints an expert it will take longer before a judgment is issued. Typically, though, proceedings before the Court of First Instance can take six to twelve months before a judgment is issued (depending on whether an expert is appointed by the Court). A Court of Appeal judgment is normally issued within three months and a Cassation judgment may take up to three to four months.

Proceedings before the ADGM and DIFC courts follow a typical common law procedure, with pleadings being filed, followed by case management, disclosure, evidence (factual and expert) and then trial preparation.

Commercial disputes in the ADGM and DIFC courts are likely to take 12–18 months before they reach trial (at first instance) unless they can be resolved earlier, either by way of Immediate or Summary Judgment or because the type of case lends itself to trial being reached sooner (for example because there is no real dispute on the facts).

The local UAE courts do not automatically apply a particular disclosure procedure. With certain conditions, parties may make discovery or disclosure applications to obtain evidence or documents that might support their position. Generally, there is no obligation to produce unhelpful documents unless the court orders otherwise.

Article 33 (1) of Federal Decree-Law No. 35/2022 Promulgating the Law of Evidence in Civil and Commercial Transactions (the “Evidence Law”) does provide that a party is entitled to ask the court to order the other party to produce a document, including where the law permits an opponent delivery, or it is a joint document or the opponent relies on it, subject to certain conditions.

Article 35 of the Evidence Law also entitles parties to commercial litigation to request that their opponents submit a document relevant to the case, or to seek permission to review such a document. The court shall order the same if: (i) the document is specifically identified; (ii) the document is related to the subject matter of the case; and (iii) the review of the document does not violate any trade secret or related rights, unless the court determines otherwise by a reasoned decision.

The ADGM and DIFC both operate a robust model of disclosure based on international arbitration practices which may result in parties being ordered to produce documents which are unhelpful to their case. It differs from the common-law style of standard disclosure as found historically in the English courts. The parties are expressly encouraged to co-operate to ensure that the disclosure process proceeds proportionately.

In summary, the procedures require a party to: (i) provide documents in support of their claim or defence upon which they will rely; (ii) make requests of their opponent for documents that are relevant and material to the outcome of the case; (iii) respond to their opponent’s requests and reply to their opponent’s responses to their own requests; and (iv) search for and provide copies of documents falling within categories of disclosure as ordered by the court. These requests should be for specific documents, or narrow and specific categories. A party can object to requests to produce on the usual grounds, which include where the requests are overly broad, irrelevant or immaterial or on the basis that the documents are not within its possession, custody or control. A party can also request to inspect documents which have been mentioned in a statement of case, witness statement or affidavit.

Parties are required to comply with the court’s orders. If they fail to do so, a party can apply for sanctions, including the striking out of a party’s claim or defence. Documents which are privileged may be withheld from inspection, and confidential and irrelevant material may be redacted.

The ADGM and DIFC courts have powers to order pre-action disclosure between parties who are likely to be parties in subsequent claims. Such powers tend to be exercised by the court sparingly. The courts also have the power to order production from non-parties. Documents disclosed in the proceedings are subject to collateral use restrictions, which preclude them from being used for the purposes of other proceedings, unless they have been referred to in open court or a party applies to vary them.

Witness testimony (written or oral) is not ordinarily used before the local UAE courts and is, in fact, generally prohibited where the amount claimed is for more than AED 50,000 save in certain limited circumstances. However, if the court allows witnesses to be called, it will postpone the matter to allow the party who has requested the witnesses time to call them. The court may also permit the other party to call counter-witnesses. A witness is questioned first by the party who called them and then cross-examined by the other party. The court may also question the witnesses to clarify certain points during the questioning or cross-examination.

In both the ADGM and DIFC courts evidence is introduced as witness evidence and there are detailed provisions contained in both sets of procedural rules governing the preparation and use of witness evidence. Where a witness is called to give evidence at trial, the witness may be cross-examined on their witness statement.

The ADGM and DIFC courts have powers to issue a witness summons requiring a witness to attend the court or a tribunal to give evidence, or to produce documents to the court. A compelled witness is ordinarily treated as the witness of the party that served the summons, although it may be possible for the summoning party to cross-examine its own witness in these circumstances. Both courts have the power to order a person to be examined by deposition. There are also provisions dealing with orders for evidence to be obtained in support of other courts, as well as for the examination of judgment debtors and corporate officers of judgment debtors in relation to the enforcement of judgments.

Following proceedings in the local UAE courts, the court will usually make an order for costs in favour of the winning party. However, the amounts awarded are generally nominal; covering only the court fees paid, experts’ fees and a nominal fee for advocacy.

In the ADGM and DIFC courts, successful parties are generally awarded a substantial amount of their legal professional fee costs, although the courts have discretion to make a different order, including issue- or percentage-based costs orders, or (more rarely) no order as to costs, such that parties must pay their own costs.

In the local UAE courts, whether before or during ongoing proceedings or after a judgment is issued, a creditor is entitled to request interim measures to protect their rights and avoid dissipation of the debtor’s assets. This is done, for example, by way of an application for a precautionary attachment before a summary judge (on an ex parte basis) to freeze identified assets and funds of the debtor. A precautionary attachment may also be issued based on foreign proceedings, or on the back of a foreign award which is yet to be recognised and enforced in the UAE.

A precautionary attachment may be ordered in circumstances where:

• a debtor has no permanent residence in the UAE;
• a creditor, based on significant evidence, fears the debtor may abscond, or remove or conceal their assets;
• if securities for the debt are threatened with loss; or
• if a creditor holds a document showing the debt due, which is not subject to condition or if they have a judgment that is not enforceable, provided the debt in question has a specific amount.

Certain assets may not be attached, such as public property owned by the State and homes used as a residence by the debtor, among others.

Importantly, an attachment will only be granted against assets that can be located and identified by the court. In order to give effect to an attachment order, if made, a Summary Judge writes to relevant authorities (the UAE Central Bank, economic departments, stock markets etc.) to investigate and then attach any assets owned by the debtor, to restrict them from disposing of those assets. As a result, attachments may take effect over funds held in a bank account, real property, moveable assets such as ships or vehicles, shares etc.

If an attachment is granted before a claim is filed, then a claimant must file its substantive claim within eight days of the attachment being enforced.

If an attachment order is made, a defendant can file an objection to such an order at any time, by way of filing a grievance, without limitation or a time bar. They can object to the nature of the attachment on legal grounds, on the merits of the attachment or the quantum attached. A defendant can also apply to the court to substitute another asset for the assets attached. Following the court’s decision on a grievance, a party may then appeal.

Under Federal Decree-Law No. 42/2022, if there are significant reasons to fear a debtor’s flight, and the debt is not less than AED 10,000, a creditor may request — even before filing a substantive case — an order banning a debtor from traveling. The debt should be of a known amount, due for payment and not restricted by any conditions. If the debt is not an ascertained amount, a judge may make a provisional quantification of it, provided that the following conditions are met:

• the claim must be based on written evidence; and
• the creditor must submit a guarantee in respect of any loss or damage the debtor may sustain because they have been prevented from travelling abroad if the travel ban is later shown not to be justified.

A wide range of interim remedies is available in the ADGM and DIFC courts, including injunctive relief, freezing orders, preservation orders, search orders, disclosure (including Norwich Pharmacal) orders, orders for the appointment of receivers, passport seizure orders and orders for a party to provide security for costs. These remedies are available in support of claims within the jurisdiction where there is a good arguable case as to the jurisdiction of the court.

The applicable principles in relation to the granting of freezing injunctions are similar to those under English law. In the DIFC courts, it is not necessary to show the existence of assets in the DIFC. It is sufficient for there to be a reasonable belief that assets exist in Dubai. The courts may also grant interim proprietary injunctions, and interim disclosure orders regarding the location of assets, including in advance of, or in the absence of, an application for a freezing order.

The ADGM and DIFC courts also have the power to issue anti-suit injunctions, including to restrain proceedings onshore. The courts will need to be satisfied that it is just and convenient to do so, and again similar principles apply to those under English law.

Injunctive relief and other interim measures may also be available in support of foreign (including arbitral) proceedings. The DIFC courts have a freestanding jurisdiction to grant freezing orders in aid of foreign proceedings. The power of the DIFC courts to determine applications for interim measures related to claims brought outside the DIFC now has a statutory basis in Article 15(4) of Dubai Law No. (2) of 2025. The exercise of that power must be linked to a foreign judgment or award which will become ultimately enforceable in the DIFC. The ADGM courts have also confirmed that they have statutory jurisdiction to award worldwide freezing orders and other interim measures in support of international enforcement proceedings.

The UAE is party to the New York Convention and is an arbitration-friendly jurisdiction. The two main arbitral institutions are the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and the Abu Dhabi International Arbitration Centre.

Arbitrations in the UAE (where not seated in the ADGM or DIFC) are governed by Federal Law No. 6 of 2018, the UAE Arbitration Law, which is largely based on the UNCITRAL Model Law and provides a secure framework for the conduct of arbitral proceedings in the UAE. The supervisory court for arbitral proceedings conducted under the UAE Arbitration Law is the federal or local court of appeal which is agreed by the parties, failing which, the court of appeal where the seat of the arbitration is located.

ADGM and DIFC seated arbitrations are governed by the ADGM Arbitration Regulations 2015 and the DIFC Arbitration Law 2008 respectively. Again, both are based on the UNCITRAL Model Law.

Yes, arbitrators can grant such interim relief as a tribunal considers necessary; both under the UAE Arbitration Law as well as the laws applicable in ADGM and DIFC seated arbitrations.

Such interim relief may take the form of measures ordering the preservation of evidence, the maintenance of goods, the preservation of assets out of which an award may be enforced, or to maintain the status quo.

The local UAE and common law courts will also intervene where necessary to enforce such interim relief as awarded by a tribunal during arbitral proceedings.

A party wishing to challenge an award must make an application to the relevant court to have the award annulled (local UAE courts) or set aside (ADGM or DIFC courts).

In the local UAE courts a party must prove any of the grounds set out at Article 53 of the UAE Arbitration Law. These include:

• the absence of an arbitration agreement, or it proving to be void;
• a party being found to have lacked legal capacity;
• a party failing to present a defence as a result of not being given notice;
• the award fails to apply the law agreed upon by the parties;
• the composition of the tribunal conflicts with either the law or the agreement; or
• the award deals with matters which are not the subject of the arbitration agreement.

The courts may also invalidate an award of their own volition if the subject matter of the arbitration is deemed to not be arbitrable or if the award contradicts the public policy of the UAE.

In the ADGM and DIFC the Courts will apply Article 58 of the ADGM Arbitration Regulations or Article 41 of the DIFC Arbitration Law, respectively. The grounds for set aside are effectively the same as those set out above in respect of the UAE Arbitration Law.

The time limit for making a set aside application is, in the ADGM and DIFC, three months from date of receipt of the award or corrected award, unless otherwise agreed. Under the UAE Arbitration Law the time limit is 30 days from notification of the award.

The UAE is a signatory to the Riyadh-Arab Agreement for Judicial Cooperation (1983) and the Gulf Cooperation Council Convention (1996). The GCC Convention and the Riyadh Convention cover many of the same topics, but importantly include the recognition and enforcement of civil judgments issued by signatory states. Both conventions have been ratified by the UAE and so deemed part of domestic UAE law, including in the ADGM and DIFC. The DIFC courts should enforce judgments for the purposes of the conventions if the issuing court had competence in accordance with the rules of international jurisdiction, meaning the common law rules on enforcement of judgments applicable in the DIFC.

The UAE is also a signatory to the New York Convention, along with a number of bilateral treaties; for example with India under the 1999 Agreement on Juridical and Judicial Cooperation in Civil and Commercial Matters for the Service of Summons, Judicial Documents, Judicial Commissions, Execution of Judgments and Arbitral Awards. Other treaties include those with China, Egypt and France.

The ADGM and DIFC courts are also both party to a number of bilateral memoranda with foreign courts, most of which follow a common law system. Those memoranda are not binding.

Article 222 of the UAE Federal Civil Procedure Code provides the requirements for the enforcement of a foreign judgment locally and confirms that “judgments and orders issued in a foreign state may be ordered to be enforced in the State under the same conditions prescribed in the Law of that foreign state for the enforcement of judgments and orders issued in the State”.

Any application for enforcement must demonstrate that:

• the UAE courts did not have exclusive jurisdiction to hear the matter and the foreign court had jurisdiction according to the relevant foreign law;
• the judgment was issued by a court in accordance with the law of the foreign state;
• the parties appeared and were properly represented;
• the judgment is final and binding; and
• the judgment does not conflict with a judgment of a UAE court or is contradictory to UAE public policy or morality.

The Civil Code states that public order shall be deemed to include conclusive rules of Islamic Sharia, matters relating to personal status such as marriage, inheritance and lineage, matters relating to sovereignty, and the other rules and foundations upon which society is based.

In addition, the application must demonstrate reciprocity between the two jurisdictions in respect of the enforcement of judgments.

The ADGM and DIFC courts may recognise and enforce a judgment of a recognised foreign court pursuant to the ADGM Founding Law (Article 13(12)) and the DIFC Court Law 2025 (Article 31), respectively. While the ADGM courts regulations follow a civil law approach, requiring reciprocity established either by a treaty or by way of the Chief Justice being satisfied of substantial reciprocity, both courts will also follow common law principles of recognition and enforcement: (i) a judgment must be final and conclusive; (ii) the foreign court must have had jurisdiction according to DIFC rules on conflict of laws; (iii) is not for a payment of tax, a fine or a penalty. A foreign judgment may be challenged if it was obtained by fraud or is contrary to UAE public policy or the principles of natural justice. The courts will not re-examine the merits of the judgment.

The process for enforcing a foreign judgment or arbitral award in the local UAE courts begins with the party seeking enforcement filing a request with the Execution Judge in the UAE court having jurisdiction over the enforcement. In terms of the requirements for filing, the legal representatives will need a power of attorney from the party filing the application, together with a legalised copy of the foreign judgment or award and a certificate that the judgment has become final, unless stated in the judgment. The local courts in the UAE usually also require a certificate from the court that issued the judgment confirming the relevant judgment has not been executed in the state where it was issued.

The Execution Judge sits in a Court of First Instance in the UAE. It is worth highlighting that the enforcement petition would be dealt with as an ex parte petition, so there would be no requirement for service on the respondent.

Once the request for enforcement is filed, the court will conduct a preliminary review to determine whether the conditions for recognition and enforcement have been met within five days as per the Civil Procedure Code. However, in practice, the Execution Judge issues their decision within one to three weeks from the date of filing. If the court is satisfied that the conditions have been met, it will issue an order recognising the award and ordering enforcement.

The judgment made by the Execution Judge to recognise and enforce an award can be appealed according to the rules and procedures prescribed for appealing a judgment.

The court’s decision in respect of the enforcement application is appealable to the Court of Appeal within 30 days. The appeal will take the form of normal proceedings, and both parties will be allowed to exchange submissions and defences. A Court of Appeal judgment may be also subject to another appeal before the Court of Cassation.

In the common law courts of the ADGM and DIFC a party seeking recognition and enforcement would ordinarily file a substantive claim and append witness evidence in support along with a certified copy of the judgment or award. In respect of a foreign court judgment, following service the recognition claim is normally determined summarily in a matter of weeks. Where the matter concerns an arbitral award, as with the local UAE court, this would be an ex parte claim that is determined on the papers without a hearing and once served with the order enforcing the award, a respondent has 14 days (or such period as may be set by the court) to apply to set aside the order. If no set aside application is filed within 14 days the matter may proceed to the enforcement stage.

The DIFC courts have in the past also allowed parties to use a direct enforcement pathway under Part 45 of the rules rather than file a claim form. This may save significant court fees, but a party must demonstrate that there are no “contestable issues” with regard to a foreign judgment.

The Execution Department of the UAE courts will follow the procedures outlined in the Civil Procedure Code for the enforcement of local judgments, such as the attachment of assets, seizure of bank accounts and any other enforcement measures depending on the nature of the judgment, the available assets and the specific circumstances of the case.

In the ADGM and DIFC, remedies may include a charge over property and orders for possession or sale; attachment of assets or earnings; execution against assets; third-party debt orders; or the appointment of a receiver.

Once a DIFC recognition order is issued, it may be enforced in the wider UAE through a special statutory execution mechanism between the DIFC courts and the Dubai courts, with an onward enforcement delegation request to the UAE courts. The actual enforcement process would then be undertaken in accordance with UAE law and procedure. This “conduit” enforcement is not available in the ADGM, and the ADGM courts will only enforce a foreign judgment or award where there are assets within that jurisdiction. Assets in “onshore” Abu Dhabi must be pursued via the Abu Dhabi court.

In addition to the remedies set out above, including attachment orders and travel bans in the UAE, as well as charging orders and other remedies in the ADGM and DIFC courts, the common law courts also provide for a judgment creditor to apply for an order requiring a judgment debtor to attend court to be examined (under oath) about its means, or any other matter about which information is needed to enforce an order as well as to produce documents in connection with such examination. In the event of non-compliance with a Part 50 order, a judge may make a committal order against the judgment debtor.

In appropriate circumstances, the ADGM and DIFC courts also have a discretion to grant injunctive relief, including freezing orders in support of a foreign judgment or award, pending enforcement.

-