UAE Trends and Developments Contributed by: Alim Khamis, Gateley Middle East
such agreements, a party agrees to finance a litigation or arbitration in exchange for a portion of the monies recovered should the action be successful. One of the matters considered by the Court addressed the assignment of rights (including arbitration). The Court reaffirmed that an assignment of rights also includes an arbitration agreement (should such a provision exist in the relevant contract). As a result, the assignee is bound by the arbitration clause and the counterparty is entitled to commence arbitration against the assignee in respect of the assigned claim. This case is significant because it reaffirms the prin - ciple that arbitration agreements are capable of assignment and can be invoked accordingly. If there is to be a waiver of arbitration, it must be established expressly and unequivocally. Any argument that seeks to establish waiver via “indirect means” such as verbal discussions or vague references is unlikely to suc - ceed. Parties can and do seek to rely on ambiguously word - ed or indirect emails or text messages in support of a claim that arbitration has been waived. Considering this decision, parties should tread cautiously in the context of an assignment to determine whether an arbitration agreement has been clearly and expressly revoked. CJT The Conflicts of Jurisdiction Tribunal (CJT) was estab - lished by decree in 2024 and was formerly known as the Joint Judicial Committee. The CJT has two man - dates: (i) to determine which court has jurisdiction where a conflict arises between the DIFC Courts and onshore courts; and (ii) to determine which judgment will prevail where both an onshore court and the DIFC Courts have issued conflicting judgments. In the case of Serene Resources DMCC v Energen DMCC , both parties to the dispute were entities head - quartered in Dubai. Having obtained a successful result in proceedings administered by the Singapore International Arbitration Centre for a Dubai-seated arbitration, Energen sought to file enforcement pro - ceedings in the DIFC Courts.
The DIFC Courts issued an order to uphold and enforce the arbitral award and additionally issued an order to freeze Serene Resources’ assets glob - ally. One week after these orders were issued, Serene Resources commenced court proceedings before the Dubai (onshore) courts to invalidate the award and also filed a request with the DIFC Courts to postpone the implementation of the award until a final judgment was issued in the local court proceedings. Subsequently, the case came before the CJT. The CJT started with the principle that onshore Dubai courts hold general jurisdiction in accordance with applicable law (in this case, the UAE Federal Arbitration Law). The CJT went on to state that none of the precondi - tions that would render DIFC Courts as the appropri - ate forum in this case were met: (i) neither party was a DIFC entity; (ii) there was no express agreement to opt into the DIFC Courts’ jurisdiction; and (iii) there were no relevant assets in the DIFC. For the reasons set out above, the CJT held that the DIFC Courts had no jurisdiction to consider Serene Resources’ enforcement and recognition claim and directed the DIFC Courts to suspend the order grant - ed previously. The CJT found that the Dubai courts were the appropriate forum to adjudicate this dispute. The upshot of this case is that it may be prudent for parties to await expiration of the 30-day period for challenging an award before commencing a recogni - tion application in the DIFC Courts, albeit that different cases are very fact-specific and require independent assessment. Revised 2026 ICC Rules The revised Arbitration Rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) that took effect on 1 June 2026 contain changes that are particularly rel - evant because of the UAE’s growing role as an ICC seat and source of ICC cases. Significant changes include: • removal of mandatory Terms of Reference in stand - ard cases;
1062 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook