UAE Trends and Developments Contributed by: Yann Mrazek, Kath Zagatti, Hermione Harrison and Ksenia Shvalova, M/HQ Corporate Services Ltd
beneficiaries receive defined economic distributions pursuant to structured policies. Council governance provisions regulate appointment powers, decision thresholds and succession of officeholders, there- by reducing uncertainty at the point of generational transition. Oversight bodies can provide an additional layer of accountability and fiduciary supervision. The UAE’s foundation regimes have evolved in line with this governance-focused approach. By com- bining statutory clarity with constitutional flexibility, recent legislative refinements have strengthened asset protection parameters and clarified limitation periods, enhancing predictability in cross-border contexts. This alignment between legal infrastructure and gov- ernance design contributes to the jurisdiction’s grow- ing role as a platform for structured intergenerational continuity. Foundations as institutional ownership platforms Within this governance-focused framework, founda- tions have emerged as a preferred ownership vehicle in the UAE across the DIFC, the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM) and the Ras Al Khaimah International Corporate Centre (RAK ICC), each of which operates under a modern and commercially responsive statu- tory regime. Unlike trusts, foundations possess separate legal per- sonality, enabling them to contract, hold assets and litigate in their own name. This feature materially sim- plifies the holding of UAE real estate and corporate shares, particularly where interaction with local regis- tries and regulatory authorities is required. The avail- ability of contemporary legislative frameworks across all three jurisdictions has contributed to the increasing use of foundations as long-term structuring vehicles. While the statutory foundations regimes share com- mon characteristics in terms of flexibility and asset protection, DIFC and ADGM, as international finan- cial centres, offer an additional layer of institutional infrastructure. Their independent common law courts, integrated regulatory environments and concentration of professional fiduciary and advisory services may be particularly relevant for complex, multi-jurisdictional structures requiring judicial predictability and financial ecosystem depth.
From a practitioner perspective, several structural fea- tures of foundations are especially significant in the context of succession planning. Constitutional certainty The foundation’s charter and by-laws define the governance architecture, including appointment mechanisms, reserved powers and the succession of officeholders. Continuity is embedded at constitu- tional level, reducing reliance on external shareholder agreements or informal arrangements that may prove insufficient during generational transition. Firewall provisions Statutory firewall provisions are designed to limit recognition of certain foreign heirship claims against foundation-held assets, subject to defined exceptions. Although not absolute, these protections enhance legal predictability in cross-border succession dis- putes and strengthen the resilience of the structure where beneficiaries reside in multiple jurisdictions. Separation of control and benefit A foundation may centralise voting control at gov- ernance level while distributing economic benefits in accordance with defined policies. This approach pre- serves strategic direction and operational coherence while accommodating diversified economic participa- tion among beneficiaries. Creditor protection framework Recent legislative refinements, including clarified limi- tation periods and evidentiary thresholds applicable to certain creditor challenges, contribute to structural durability. Provided transfers are not effected with intent to defraud creditors, these parameters reduce uncertainty in relation to retrospective claims. Judicial oversight Disputes concerning the exercise of council powers, interpretation of constitutional documents or alleged breaches of fiduciary duty may be adjudicated within established common law court systems. Foundations established in the DIFC and ADGM fall within the juris- diction of their respective independent courts, while RAK ICC foundations may elect to submit disputes to DIFC or ADGM courts. The availability of recognised judicial forums enhances enforceability, strengthens
207 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook