Obtaining an arbitral award is not the end of the road to redress. Execution
or recognition is the subsequent phase, and this phase can be complex and
prodigious especially if enforcement is supposed to be beyond the jurisdiction
from where the award was obtained. Implementation of foreign arbitral awards in
UAE challenging, particularly in cases where the award debtor tries to evade
from his obligations. Arbitration Lawyers of Dubai invariably advise their
clients or award creditor to formulate strategies for enforcement of the award.
An automatic acknowledgement is offered to the applicability of the New York
Convention on Recognition and enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (NYC), in
case of implementing foreign arbitral awards. UAE is a signatory to New York
Convention since 2006 and posts acceding the treaty, UAE courts have customized
their approach towards enforcement. In a nutshell, UAE after signing the treaty
have also implemented foreign awards which although doesn’t meet the
requirements of the Civil Procedure Code but comply with New York Convention.
NYC in UAE
Article 5 of the BYC states that “a foreign arbitral award will be recognized
and enforced in any country signatory to NYC, post the application to the
competent court by the party to the award, and the opposing party fails to
satisfy the court orders in the following manner:
#
The arbitration agreement is not valid in accordance with the law of the country
in which award was passed or cannot be arbitrated, or parties are incapable of
entering into the agreement;
#
Failure of issuing a proper notice to the parties regarding arbitration
proceedings;
#
The law is not binding upon the parties;
#
The matter of the dispute cannot be referred to arbitration;
#
Arbitral authority was not appointed pursuant to the law of the seat of
arbitration;
#
Enforcement of the award will oppose the public policy of the territory.
New York Convention has incited crucial discussions while changing the UAE
courts protocol towards enforcing arbitral awards especially in the absence of
concrete legislation explicitly implementing the clauses of NYC in UAE law. A
trend favouring NYC can be witnessed through various court’s decisions issued in
accordance with NYC principles.
Fujairah Court of First Instance in Case Number 35 of 2010 passed a decision for
the enforcement of foreign arbitral award pursuant to the NYC. The concerned
judgment the first of its kind and explicitly recognized the treaties or
conventions signed by UAE. The judgment struck down numerous traditionally used
principles for enforcing an arbitral and set an example for further cases.
A strong impression was created by Macsteel International vs Airmech judgment of
the Dubai Court of Cassation in 2012, which decided to not apply the provisions
of Civil Procedure Law while enforcing the foreign arbitral awards. Thus,
application of NYC was imposed. However, a dissenting view was observed in CCI
vs Ministry of Irrigation of the Democratic Republic of the Sudan where Dubai
Court of Cassation opined that the enforcement of an award can be refused
obtained in NYC signatory countries due to lack of a place of residence or if
the courts lack the jurisdiction to entertain the matter.
In 2014 Reyami vs BTI Court of Cassation decision regarding ratification of an
award issued in Germany, mentioned that UAE had issued a law ratifying the NYC
and thus, the provisions of NYC should be applied while enforcement of
arbitration awards.
On the contrary to the foregoing, the enforcement of awards from countries which
are not signatory to NYC. In such cases, a bilateral treaty between UAE and the
concerned country is a potential route for enforcing the award. UAE has signed
numerous bilateral treaties with countries such as Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Riyadh,
France and GCC.
New Arbitration Law
Federal Law Number 6 of 2018 regarding Arbitration Law governs arbitration in
UAE. However, the law is silent on procedures regarding enforcement of foreign
arbitral awards in UAE. We still stand inert in determining the laws which will
be applicable in recognizing the foreign awards and how. In reference to Article
3 of the New York Convention, the contracting parties or states should not
impose any rigorous preconditions on the recognition and enforcement of awards
compared to the conditions of enforcing domestic awards. We believe that the
provisions of the New Law will be applicable to the foreign awards. However, we
wait for such a precedent. Pursuant to Article 55 of the new Law and Article 4
of the New York Convention, the party seeking for enforcement of foreign award
shall submit a request fulfilling the conditions outlined in the foregoing
provisions.
Whereas, any party desiring to challenge the enforcement of a foreign award can
file their defence claim in the competent court ratifying the award pursuant to
Article 55 of the Law. The new Law does not allow parties to file a request to
set aside the award in accordance with Article 53 of the new Law, as UAE courts
lack jurisdiction to set aside a particular award.
Conclusion
Following some underlying hesitance, there is a positive pattern creating for
the UAE courts to perceive the supremacy of the New York Convention, and apply
it. These court decisions demonstrate a positive move for the implementation
routine in the UAE for those looking to uphold outside arbitral awards in the
UAE. However, it is essential to hold up under as a primary concern that the UAE
has a civil law system wherein precedents do not hold importance. Ergo, a
decision passed by one judge does not tie another, and he is free not to
consider the judgments passed by another court.
Comments