Can a UAE court reduce a demurrage invoice?

• Demurrage and detention are contractual charges, so the entitlement comes from the charterparty or the bill of lading.
• A shipowner cannot hold cargo on board for unpaid freight unless the contract allows it. It must apply to the court.
• A consignee is bound by charterparty terms only where it knew of them.
• Since 1 June 2026 a debtor can ask the court to reduce an agreed charge it proves is exaggerated.

Where a demurrage or detention charge comes from

Federal Decree-Law No. 43 of 2023, in force since 29 March 2024, does not define demurrage or detention, and it fixes no rate for either. Article 130 allows the parties to agree terms that depart from the non-mandatory provisions on charterparties, so the entitlement comes from the contract. Our dispute resolution lawyers in the UAE act for shippers, consignees, forwarders and carriers on these claims.

Three instruments apply in order. The Maritime Law governs the question first. Where it contains no provision, Federal Decree-Law No. 50 of 2022 applies to maritime activity as commercial business. Where that law is silent, the Civil Transactions Law applies.

That order matters because the charge itself is compensation for delay. The Maritime Law says nothing about the amount. The rate, the free period and the trigger all come from the clause, and the limits on the amount come from the Civil Transactions Law.

Whether the carrier can hold your cargo until the charge is paid

Article 133 of the Maritime Law treats the cargo as security for freight and related charges. The shipowner may not detain it on arrival at the discharge port because payment has not been made.

The shipowner must apply to the Summary Judge instead, and the application can be made without notice. It may seek attachment of the cargo, discharge into shore storage, or custody by a third party. Sale follows where payment is still outstanding and no adequate security is offered. Article 133 also preserves a lien over the cargo for 15 days after delivery. That lien fails where a third party acquires rights over the goods in good faith.

Article 130 allows the parties to agree otherwise. In Cassation No. 1729/2023, decided on 24 April 2024, the Dubai Court of Cassation allowed a disponent owner to suspend discharge until freight was paid. The charterparty required payment before breaking bulk, and the court awarded demurrage for the waiting time. The clause changed the outcome.

A precautionary attachment carries its own deadline. The applicant must then file the substantive claim within eight days of the attachment order under Federal Decree-Law No. 42 of 2022. Court proceedings and arbitration both count, and missing that date releases the cargo. The same procedure applies to the vessel, which our article on ship arrest under the 2023 Maritime Law explains.

Whether a consignee who never signed the charterparty is liable

Article 131(4) of the Maritime Law makes charterparty terms binding between the shipowner and the charterer. Those terms do not bind a third party unless that party knew of them.

A bill of lading that incorporates the charterparty gives the consignee that knowledge. Where the bill of lading contains no incorporation wording, the shipowner has to prove the consignee knew of the lien and demurrage clauses. The drafting decides the claim.

A liner detention charge works differently. It rests on the bill of lading itself rather than on a charterparty. A consignee that presents the original bill and takes delivery does so on those terms, including the merchant clause. That clause defines the merchant widely, and the definition covers the shipper, the holder of the bill, the consignee and the receiver of the goods. Each of them can be invoiced under it, and the carrier chooses which one to pursue. Cargo claims against the carrier follow separate rules, covered in our article on carrier liability for cargo loss.

How to reduce a charge you say is excessive

Article 340 of Federal Decree-Law No. 25 of 2025 allows the court to reduce compensation that the parties agreed in advance. That law took effect on 1 June 2026 and replaced the 1985 Civil Code in full.

The court may reduce the agreed amount on three grounds. The debtor proves the amount was exaggerated. The debtor proves the obligation was partly performed, so the agreed sum exceeds the actual loss. Or the creditor, by its own fault, caused the harm or made it worse. Where the creditor's fault significantly exceeds the debtor's, the court may refuse compensation altogether.

Increases work the other way. Under Article 340(4) a creditor may claim more than the agreed figure only where it proves fraud or gross negligence.

The third reduction ground is the one that answers most container disputes. Delay caused by the carrier's own release process, or by a document the carrier failed to provide, is creditor fault. The consignee has to evidence it, day by day.

Evidence decides these applications. Email chains showing when the release was requested, terminal gate records, and the dates on the delivery order carry more weight than a narrative account. The court compares the agreed rate against the loss the creditor can prove.

Check the date of the contract before relying on any of this. Contracts made before 1 June 2026 remain under the 1985 Civil Code. Article 390(2) of that code gave the court a broader power to adjust the agreed sum to match actual loss. Any agreement excluding that power was void. Our guide to reducing agreed compensation in the UAE covers the older position in detail.

How the three charges differ

Demurrage, detention and storage cover different periods and are claimed by different parties, and a single invoice can combine all three.

Where the delay comes from customs rather than the consignee

A customs hold does not stop the charge. Demurrage and detention accrue against the clock in the contract, and the Maritime Law provides no exception for a shipment held for inspection or classification.

The route to relief is Article 340 again. Where the hold followed a document the carrier or the forwarder prepared incorrectly, that is creditor fault, and the court may reduce the charge accordingly. Where the hold followed the importer's own declaration, the charge stands. Our article on Dubai Customs audits and voluntary disclosure covers what happens to the declaration itself.

What to do when the invoice arrives

• Obtain the charterparty or the bill of lading and identify the clause that creates the charge.
• Check whether the bill of lading incorporates the charterparty, because that decides whether a consignee is bound.
• Note the contract date, since agreements made before 1 June 2026 are assessed under the 1985 Civil Code.
• Record every day of delay the carrier or the terminal caused, with the documents that prove it.
• Where the carrier attaches the cargo, diarise the eight day deadline for its substantive claim.

Contract terms decide most of this before any dispute begins. Our article on commercial contracts for UAE logistics companies covers the clauses that allocate these charges.

Is the charge on your invoice actually owed?

Three questions answer most of these disputes. Which document creates the charge. Whether the party being invoiced is bound by that document. And whether the amount survives the reduction grounds in Article 340.

Legal advice may be required to assess how these obligations apply to a specific shipment, its contract chain and the date the contract was made.

‍