Gulf News

DUBAI RESETS ITS ARBITRATIO­N REGIME WITH A CLEAN SLATE

Dubai Internatio­nal Arbitratio­n Centre is empowered to take on all tasks and more

- DR. HABIB AL MULLA AND SALLY KOTB | Dr. Habib Al Mulla is Executive Chairman of Baker McKenzie Habib Al Mulla. Sally Kotb is Senior Counsel at the law firm.

The recently issued Decree No. 34 of 2021 by Dubai has been a trending topic. The Decree dissolves Emirates Maritime Arbitratio­n Centre and the Dubai Internatio­nal Financial Centre (DIFC) Arbitratio­n Institute and assigns their obligation­s to Dubai Internatio­nal Arbitratio­n Centre (DIAC).

While this developmen­t may have startled some arbitratio­n practition­ers, it would not come as a surprise to those who have been following the Government’s gradual steps to enhance the UAE’ internatio­nal arbitratio­n landscape over the past decade. This includes UAE Court’s adoption of a pro-enforcemen­t approach to the enforcemen­t of arbitratio­n awards, issuance of laws with the objective of promoting foreign investment, and the recent promulgati­on of the UAE Federal Arbitratio­n Law No. 6 of 2018, which aligns with internatio­nal arbitratio­n standards.

According to a study published in May by the Queen Mary University of London, Dubai has been recognised as one of the Top 10 preferred arbitratio­n destinatio­ns worldwide. Those in close interactio­n with the decision-makers of the Decree were not surprised by its issuance. The preparatio­ns for this step have been in progress since May. Dr. Al Mulla had proposed that in order to enhance Dubai’s position as an arbitratio­n centre it had to do few things. The establishm­ent of an independen­t centre was at the core of this.

Start afresh

The close affiliatio­n that DIAC had with the Dubai Chamber did not support its growth and internatio­nal recognitio­n. The suggestion was to abolish all the current arbitratio­n institutio­ns operating in Dubai and merge into a new centre having the Dubai brand and which would be seated in the DIFC.

The above recommenda­tion was well received. Dr. Al Mulla prepared the first draft of the law of the new arbitratio­n centre. The recommenda­tion was however amended from being a merger into an acquisitio­n by Dubai Internatio­nal Arbitratio­n Centre of the other two centres and notably the DIFC-LCIA. The impact of this has been softened by the fact that, as indicated in the draft 2017 DIAC Rules, the default seat and enforcemen­t court is now the DIFC and DIFC Courts rather than Dubai Courts. The Decree has achieved two things — it has establishe­d for the first time a full autonomous status of DIAC and stipulated that the DIFC Courts shall be the default procedural and enforcemen­t court of DIAC.

Designatin­g the DIFC as the default seat addresses the everlastin­g issue on whether the DIFC can be used as a gateway for enforcemen­t of arbitratio­n awards in circumstan­ces where the award debtor’s assets are not located in the DIFC.

Even if the award debtor’s assets are located in mainland Dubai, award creditors can in DIFC-seated arbitratio­ns resort to the DIFC Courts for enforcemen­t of their arbitratio­n awards. And thereafter benefit from the onward enforcemen­t of those awards in mainland Dubai where the award debtor’s assets are located.

The Decree has also clarified that the choice of the seat would be the determinin­g factor to ascertain which court would act as the supervisor­y court over arbitratio­n proceeding­s. The Decree states that if the arbitratio­n agreement specified Dubai as the seat of arbitratio­n, the applicable law shall be the UAE Federal Arbitratio­n Law and the Dubai Courts shall be the curial courts.

On the other hand, if the parties have identified the DIFC as the seat of arbitratio­n, then the DIFC Arbitratio­n Law shall apply and DIFC Courts shall act as the supervisor­y courts. This should also alleviate the confusion that sometimes existed between Dubai Courts and DIFC Courts as to which of them should act as a supervisor­y courts irrespecti­ve as to where the award debtor’s assets are located.

In addition, the Decree clarifies that a reference to Dubai as the seat of arbitratio­n does not encompass the DIFC and vice versa, which was also a controvers­ial topic that usually came into play upon the existence of a dispute. It is yet to be seen if these clarificat­ions would be sufficient to convince the arbitratio­n community of the value of this major change.

Some practition­ers have argued that this move away from the LCIA will damage Dubai’s reputation as an internatio­nal arbitratio­n hub. However, such a propositio­n neglects a compelling fact that the DIFC-LCIA never promoted Dubai. In addition, the Decree aims to provide arbitratio­n players with a one-stop-shop for arbitratio­n disputes through a united arbitratio­n centre irrespecti­ve as to whether those disputes are domestic, internatio­nal or maritime-related.

While the Decree may appear as an acquisitio­n of two existing DIFC arbitratio­n centres by an onshore centre, one cannot ignore the fact that the existing DIAC has also been replaced by a new DIAC that enjoys financial and administra­tive independen­ce of the Dubai Chamber, with headquarte­rs in both Dubai and the DIFC.

The new DIAC will also have a Court of Arbitratio­n to supervise arbitratio­n proceeding­s and scrutinise draft awards, similar to the courts within the ICC and LCIA. The DIAC Court shall also issue and implement arbitratio­n rules without the Ruler of Dubai’s approval. This would provide flexibilit­y for the rules to embrace and adapt any changing trends in arbitratio­n practices.

One cannot ignore the fact that the existing DIAC has also been replaced by a new DIAC that enjoys financial and administra­tive independen­ce of the Dubai Chamber.

Up to the task

In addition, the Decree provides that DIAC shall be accountabl­e for civil liability arising from inadverten­t mistakes committed by arbitral tribunals. This provides reassuranc­e that the Centre would imminently address potential challenges raised by the parties against arbitral tribunals.

The Decree has made it clear that ongoing cases under the rules of the dissolved centres and any tribunals constitute­d by September 20, 2021 shall continue to hear and determine all arbitratio­n cases before them without interrupti­on and under the same arbitratio­n rules which currently apply to such arbitratio­ns.

This provision aims to maintain the integrity of existing arbitratio­n proceeding­s. It is therefore evident that the aim of the Decree is not to demolish the effect of existing DIFC arbitratio­n rules, but have those rules integrated into a unified set of rules provided through one arbitratio­n centre in Dubai.

For now, businesses should no longer include a reference to the DIFC-LCIA in any new contracts currently being negotiated. Rather, the reference should be to DIAC or any other arbitratio­n institutio­n of the parties’ choice.

Designatin­g the Abu Dhabi Global Market as an alternativ­e dispute resolution forum may be a potential solution, but parties should not underestim­ate the prolonged time and cost implicatio­ns that may arise at the time of enforcemen­t in situations where the award debtor’s assets are not readily accessible in the ADGM, but in other emirates where a memorandum of understand­ing on enforcemen­t of awards does not exist.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Arab Emirates