OMAN Law and Practice Contributed by: Mohammed Al Khalili, Jenna Al Bakry, Joud Lashko and Abdullah Al Raiisi, Al Khalili, Al Ghailani & Co LLP
dication, reduce claim fragmentation, and ensure pro- cedural uniformity In practical terms, the codification transformed long- standing communal petitions into a structured proce- dural mechanism allowing the collective prosecution of claims within the civil and commercial circuits of the primary courts. This shift marked a pivotal moment in Omani procedural development: a transition from informal, conciliatory dispute resolution to institution- alised collective adjudication within a modern judici- ary. Regulatory Expansion and Public Enforcement The subsequent phase of development was char- acterised by the emergence of sectoral regulatory authorities endowed with statutory enforcement pow- ers. Throughout the early 2000s, Oman established specialised regulators including the Capital Market Authority, the Telecommunications Regulatory Author- ity, and later the Public Authority for Consumer Pro- tection (PACP) ‒ each mandated to safeguard collec- tive or public interests within its respective domain. The enactment of the Consumer Protection Law (CPL) by Royal Decree 66/2014 constituted a defining mile- stone in this evolution. Article 13 of the CPL authorised the chairperson of the PACP to “take the necessary measures and actions to guarantee consumer rights [...] and to stop any violation or breach against con- sumer rights or general health and safety rules”. This legislative innovation introduced a public law dimen- sion to collective redress by transferring enforcement capacity from private individuals to the regulatory authority acting ex officio in the public interest. The policy rationale underpinning this reform was two- fold – namely, the aim was to: • mitigate the procedural and financial burdens borne by individual consumers lacking resources to litigate independently; and • promote market consistency and legal certainty by consolidating enforcement within a centralised administrative framework, thereby avoiding diver- gent judicial outcomes in fragmented private suits.
Accordingly, Oman’s collective redress architecture evolved from private aggregation toward state-led regulatory enforcement, reflecting a controlled expan- sion of collective remedy within a public governance paradigm. Contemporary Framework and Policy Orientation Modern Omani jurisprudence operates under a dual paradigm – procedural aggregation under the Civil and Commercial Procedure Law and administrative collective enforcement under sectoral legislation. The judiciary maintains the principle that standing must be personal and direct, yet recognises that joint pro- ceedings may be appropriate where multiple claim- ants share an identical legal foundation. From a policy standpoint, Oman has pursued institu- tionally mediated collective enforcement over liberal- ised class litigation. This deliberate restraint reflects the State’s broader governance philosophy, which pri- oritises judicial economy, procedural coherence and regulatory discipline over adversarial expansion. The central policy drivers have thus been: • judicial efficiency – to prevent multiplicity of pro- ceedings; • consumer and investor protection – to ensure access to remedy through competent authorities; and • regulatory coherence – to maintain consistency of enforcement across sectors. Collective claims are therefore treated not as instru- ments of private mass litigation but as extensions of the public interest, administered within the boundaries of procedural regularity and institutional oversight. To date, there has been no legislative initiative to enact a formal class action statute. Nonetheless, emerging policy discourse – particularly within the fields of con- sumer protection, environmental regulation, and finan- cial governance – suggests a gradual shift towards enhanced collective accountability through adminis- trative mechanisms. Any prospective reform is likely to favour incremental integration of collective remedies within existing civil procedure rather than wholesale transplantation of foreign class action models.
221 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook