UNITED ARAB EMRITES Law and Practice Contributed by: Ali Dakhlallah, Karen Seif, Matthew Page and William Prasifka, Habib Al Mulla & Partners
vation of evidence and status quo orders. This juris- diction operates alongside the tribunal’s powers under Article 21 and is particularly important where urgent relief is required or where third parties are involved. Courts generally respect the arbitration agreement and do not treat such applications as a waiver of arbitration. Interim relief is also available in the courts of the DIFC and the ADGM. When offshore courts have jurisdiction to order interim relief in support of arbitration (typically where the arbitration is seated offshore), these courts may grant a full range of interim remedies in support of arbitration or ADR, including freezing injunctions, interim injunctions, disclosure orders and security for costs. These courts act in a supportive and supervi- sory capacity, ensuring the effectiveness of arbitral proceedings. 6.3 Timing of Applications for Interim Relief In onshore civil and commercial litigation, applications for interim relief are almost always made before the merits case is filed, or concurrently with it, depend- ing on the urgency of the situation. The objective is normally to impose the element of surprise to ensure that the debtor/respondent is unable to move assets, conceal evidence and/or escape the country. Unlike onshore courts, DIFC and ADGM courts do not generally favour standalone interim applications disconnected from underlying proceedings. As such, interim relief is normally sought alongside or after the case on the merits is launched or adjudicated. 6.4 Security for Costs A party may apply for security for costs in the UAE, but its availability and scope differ significantly between onshore courts, arbitration and the DIFC/ADGM. In onshore UAE (including Dubai courts), there is no developed or commonly used regime for security for costs under the UAE Civil Procedure Law (Federal Decree-Law No 42 of 2022). While courts have gen- eral discretionary powers, applications for security for costs are rare and not systematically recognised. Instead, protection is achieved indirectly through mechanisms such as court fees, guarantees or pre- cautionary measures (eg, attachment orders). As a
result, defendants cannot routinely compel claimants to provide security for potential adverse costs. In contrast, security for costs is an established proce- dural tool in UAE arbitrations, as well as in the DIFC and the ADGM courts. Arbitral tribunals and courts may order a claimant to provide security where there is a real risk that the defendant will be unable to recov- • the claimant’s financial position or insolvency; • whether the claimant is resident outside the juris- diction; • the merits of the claim (not frivolous but may be weak); • the claimant’s conduct; and • the presence of TPF. 6.5 Interim Injunctions A party can apply for interim injunctions in the UAE, but their scope and the test for granting them differ between onshore courts and the DIFC/ADGM. In onshore UAE (including Dubai courts), interim relief is granted in the form of precautionary or summary orders rather than broad common law injunctions. Courts may issue orders to preserve the status quo, prevent harm or secure rights, typically under the UAE Civil Procedure Law (Federal Decree-Law No 42 of 2022). Interim injunctions are usually granted where the applicant demonstrates: • a prima facie right or claim; • urgency or risk of irreparable harm; or • the need to prevent dissipation of assets or loss of evidence. er costs if successful. Key factors include: The DIFC and the ADGM follow common law princi- ples. Courts typically apply a test similar to the English standard, considering: • whether there is a serious issue to be tried; • whether damages would be an adequate remedy; • the balance of convenience; and • any risk of injustice.
527 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook