UNITED ARAB EMRITES Law and Practice Contributed by: Ali Dakhlallah, Karen Seif, Matthew Page and William Prasifka, Habib Al Mulla & Partners
9.4 Grounds for Resisting Enforcement A party may resist enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards in the UAE on limited, well-defined grounds, which differ slightly between onshore courts and the DIFC/ADGM but broadly reflect international standards. In onshore UAE (including Dubai courts), resistance to enforcement of foreign judgments is governed by the UAE Civil Procedure Law (Federal Decree-Law No 42 of 2022). A court may refuse enforcement where: • the foreign court lacked jurisdiction; • the judgment is not final or enforceable; • the defendant was not properly notified or denied due process; • the judgment conflicts with a prior UAE judgment; • enforcement would violate UAE public policy or morals; or • reciprocity is not satisfied. For foreign arbitral awards, refusal is governed by the UAE Federal Arbitration Law (Federal Arbitration Law No 6 of 2018) and the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Grounds include: • invalid arbitration agreement or incapacity; • lack of proper notice or inability to present a case; • award exceeds the scope of submission to arbitra- tion; • irregularity in composition of tribunal or procedure; • award not yet binding or set aside at the seat; and • non-arbitrability or violation of public policy. In the DIFC and the ADGM, similar grounds apply under common law principles, with a strong pro- enforcement bias. Overall, resistance is narrowly confined to jurisdictional defects, procedural fairness and public policy concerns, reflecting the UAE’s arbi- tration-friendly approach.
UAE is a party. The same limited grounds for refusal apply, including incapacity, procedural irregularity, or public policy concerns. UAE courts generally adopt a pro-enforcement approach. In the DIFC and the ADGM, enforcement follows com- mon law procedures, with streamlined recognition and strong judicial support for arbitration. Awards can be recognised and then enforced locally or used as a basis for execution onshore. Overall, the UAE provides a robust and arbitration- friendly enforcement regime for both domestic and foreign awards. 9.3 Length of Time The duration of enforcement proceedings in the UAE varies depending on whether enforcement is sought onshore or in the DIFC/ADGM, and whether the mat- ter is contested. In onshore UAE (including Dubai courts), enforcement of judgments or arbitral awards typically involves two stages: recognition (ratification) and execution. If uncontested, recognition may take approximately 1–3 months, while execution (including asset attachment, bank inquiries, and sale) may take an additional 3–6 months. However, if the debtor raises objections, files appeals or resists execution, the process can extend to 6–12 months or longer, particularly in complex or high-value matters involving multiple assets or juris- dictions. In contrast, the DIFC and the ADGM offer faster and more streamlined enforcement procedures. Recogni- tion of judgments or arbitral awards is often completed within a few weeks to 2–3 months, especially if uncon- tested. Execution is also more efficient, supported by common law mechanisms such as disclosure orders and contempt sanctions. In practice, timelines depend heavily on the co-oper- ation of the debtor, asset traceability and procedural challenges, but the DIFC and ADGM are generally quicker and more enforcement-friendly than onshore UAE courts.
10. Dispute Resolution and AI 10.1 Regulation
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in dispute resolu- tion in the UAE is not yet specifically regulated, but it is
531 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook