Federal Supreme Court, Commercial Appeal No. 85 of 2020, judgment of 24 March 2020
Under Article 72(2)(a) of Cabinet Resolution No. 57 of 2018 (the implementing regulation of the Civil Procedure Law then in force), an execution judge's decision on whether he has jurisdiction to enforce an execution title may be appealed directly to the competent Court of Appeal. An execution judge's order granting leave to enforce a foreign arbitral award and appending the enforcement formula falls within that category, because in making it the judge assumed jurisdiction over the request. An appeal against such an order is admissible, and the Court of Appeal must decide it on the merits.
A shipowner obtained an award in October 2018 from an arbitrator under the London Maritime Arbitrators Association in England, ordering the charterers of its vessel, domiciled in Sharjah, to pay EUR 220,337 with interest at 5 per cent a year compounded quarterly, together with costs. In February 2019 the shipowner applied by petition to the execution judge of the Sharjah federal court of first instance to give the award executory force; the judge granted leave to enforce it, appended the enforcement formula and opened an execution file against the charterers. The charterers appealed, but the Sharjah federal Court of Appeal held the appeal inadmissible on the ground that the decision was not one of the cases listed exhaustively in Article 72(2) of the 2018 regulation in which an execution judge's decisions may be appealed directly. The Federal Supreme Court quashed that judgment. Article 72(2) allows a direct appeal against an execution judge's decision concerning, among other things, his jurisdiction or lack of jurisdiction to enforce the execution title. The execution judge, in whom the law concentrates the powers over enforcement and who supervises it at every step, had assumed jurisdiction over the application and the documents attached to it when he decided that there was no objection to enforcement. The order therefore fell within item (a), the appeal met the formal requirements and had to be decided on its merits, one way or the other. By declining to do so, the Court of Appeal had erred in law. The case was remitted.
The case shows how a foreign award was enforced in the federal courts under the 2018 regulation, by petition to the execution judge, and confirms that the award debtor could appeal that order directly to the Court of Appeal. The regulation implemented the 1992 Civil Procedure Law, which has since been replaced by Federal Decree-Law No. 42 of 2022, so the ruling was decided under procedural rules no longer in force.
| Article 72(2)(a) of Cabinet Resolution No. 57 of 2018 on the implementing regulation of Federal Law No. 11 of 1992 (Civil Procedure Law) |
| Federal Law No. 11 of 1992 (Civil Procedure Law), as implemented by that regulation Decided under this law; it has been replaced by Civil Procedure Code. |
“قاضي التنفيذ بسط يده للفصل في الطلب بحكم جمع القانون السلطات المتعلقة بالتنفيذ في يده دون غيره”Short quotation from the judgment as published by the court. The full judgment is on the court’s official service.
An employer's admission that a bonus was promised on conditions cannot be split to enforce the promise alone
An admission, judicial or not, is a person's acknowledgment of a right against him that relieves the other party of proving it; it binds only if it establishes the right …
Claims by or against a federal authority belong to the federal courts, not to an emirate's local courts
Under Article 102 of the Constitution, civil, commercial and administrative disputes between the Federation and individuals, whether the Federation is claimant or defenda…
A defendant that pleads on the merits before invoking the arbitration clause loses the right to rely on it
Under Article 8(1) of the Federal Arbitration Law (Federal Law No. 6 of 2018), a court seised of a dispute covered by an arbitration agreement must declare the claim inad…
A conflict-of-jurisdiction claim is premature while the Abu Dhabi and Dubai courts have not yet ruled on jurisdiction
Under Articles 33(9)-(10) and 60 of Federal Law No. 10 of 1973 on the Federal Supreme Court, the Court alone resolves conflicts of jurisdiction between the federal courts…
An arbitral award can be attacked only by an annulment action, and a cassation appeal must target the resulting judgment
Article 53 of the Federal Arbitration Law (Federal Law No. 6 of 2018) lays down the only way to object to an arbitral award: an action for annulment brought directly befo…
An employer's request to set off a loan against end-of-service gratuity must be made at first instance
A request that the court set off a sum the defendant claims from the plaintiff, such as an employer's demand to deduct a loan from the employee's end-of-service gratuity,…
Whether you are establishing a new venture, restructuring an existing enterprise, or exploring residency pathways — we are here to advise.
Arrange a Consultation →