Enforcing a foreign arbitral award in the UAE after 2025

• A foreign award is enforced by application to the execution judge, without a fresh claim on the merits.
• The execution judge must decide the application within five working days.
• The Dubai Court of Cassation now confines the grounds for refusal to those in the New York Convention.
• Recent judgments rejected objections based on debtor domicile and on arbitrators not signing every page.

How a foreign award is enforced onshore

Article 222(2) of Federal Decree-Law No. 42 of 2022 requires an application to enforce a foreign award to be made to the execution judge. The judge must decide it within five working days. The decision can be appealed within 30 days. Our UAE arbitration counsel act for award creditors enforcing against UAE assets and for award debtors resisting enforcement.

The UAE acceded to the 1958 New York Convention by Federal Decree No. 43 of 2006. Article 223 of the Civil Procedure Law adds two conditions of its own. The subject of the award must be capable of arbitration under UAE law. The award must also be enforceable in the country where it was made.

The route is administrative in form. The creditor does not file a lawsuit, the court does not rehear the dispute, and no merits hearing takes place. That speed is one reason arbitration is preferred over foreign litigation for contracts with UAE counterparties. The slower judgment route is covered in our article on enforcing foreign judgments in the UAE.

What the Convention allows a court to refuse

Article V of the New York Convention lists the only grounds on which a court may refuse to recognise or enforce a foreign award.

The award debtor must prove one of five. A party lacked capacity, or the arbitration agreement was invalid. The debtor was not given proper notice or could not present its case. The award decided matters outside the submission to arbitration. The tribunal or the procedure did not follow the parties' agreement or the law of the seat. Or the award is not yet binding, or has been set aside at the seat.

Two further grounds are for the court to raise itself. The subject matter may be incapable of settlement by arbitration under the law of the enforcing state. Or enforcement may be contrary to its public policy.

The three objections that used to succeed in Dubai

Between 2013 and 2022 the onshore Dubai courts refused a series of foreign awards on grounds that went beyond the text of the Convention.

The first was domicile. In Case No. 156 of 2013, decided on 18 August 2013, the Dubai Court of Cassation refused three ICC awards rendered in Paris. The debtor was the Republic of Sudan, and the court held it had no jurisdiction because Sudan had no domicile in the UAE. In Carnival SG v Elan Qatar, Case No. 790 of 2022, decided on 19 October 2022, it refused an LCIA award on the same basis. The Qatari debtor held shares in two Dubai companies, but those companies were not parties to the award.

The second was signatures. In Case No. 403 of 2020 and Case No. 109 of 2022, the court refused foreign awards signed only on the final page. It treated the domestic rule in Federal Law No. 6 of 2018 on signing every page as a rule of procedure. Article III of the Convention allows a state to apply its own procedure.

The third was the Civil Procedure Law itself. Article 222 sets conditions for enforcing foreign court judgments. Courts applied those conditions to arbitral awards as an extra layer on top of the Convention.

How the Dubai Court of Cassation changed course in 2025

In Judgments Nos. 778 and 887 of 2025 (Commercial), the Dubai Court of Cassation addressed the Civil Procedure Law conditions directly. It held that Article 222 applies to foreign court judgments only, and not to awards governed by the Convention.

The same judgments confirmed that neither UAE law nor the Convention requires every arbitrator to sign a foreign award. They held that capacity and authority questions decided in the arbitration cannot be reopened at the enforcement stage. And they confined public policy objections to the law of the seat, unless the award conflicts substantially with UAE public policy.

On 6 November 2025 the court went further in Civil Appeal No. 420 of 2025. It upheld enforcement against a Russian entity that argued the Dubai Courts lacked jurisdiction over a debtor with no UAE domicile. It also rejected a public policy objection based on unsigned pages. And it rejected the argument that sanctions had deprived the debtor of its right to a defence.

The direction is consistent with the court's earlier position in Al Reyami v BTI, Case No. 434 of 2013, decided on 23 November 2014. There the court rejected the argument that distribution agreements cannot be arbitrated and enforced the award under the Convention.

What still defeats a foreign award

Article 223 of the Civil Procedure Law still requires the subject matter to be capable of arbitration under UAE law. Disputes the law reserves to the courts, including certain real estate and registered commercial agency matters, remain exposed.

Public policy also remains, although the 2025 judgments narrowed it to substantial conflict. The clearest example is a conflict with Sharia principles that the courts treat as fundamental. That risk matters most in finance disputes, covered in our article on Islamic finance in the UAE.

Time is the third limit. Under Article 212(4) of the Civil Procedure Law, the execution judge may close a file temporarily. That follows where the creditor takes no step for more than a year. Under Article 212(5), a writ of execution abandoned for 15 years can no longer be executed.

Onshore courts or the DIFC

The DIFC Courts also recognise foreign awards, under DIFC Law No. 1 of 2008, and their judgments can then be executed onshore. That route was historically used where the onshore courts looked less receptive.

The 2025 onshore judgments reduce the reason to take it. A creditor enforcing against assets in mainland Dubai can now apply directly to the execution judge with more confidence than at any point before. Our article on enforcing a DIFC judgment in mainland Dubai covers the onward route to onshore assets and its current limits.

What to prepare before filing

• Obtain the original award or a certified copy, with the arbitration agreement, as Article IV of the Convention requires.
• Arrange a certified Arabic translation of both, since onshore proceedings are conducted in Arabic.
• Confirm the award is final and binding at the seat, and that no set-aside proceedings are pending there.
• Identify the UAE assets first, because enforcement is only as valuable as what the execution judge can attach.
• Keep the file active, since a year without steps allows the judge to close it.

Once recognised, the award enters the ordinary execution system for bank freezes, property attachment and travel bans. Our article on enforcing a UAE court judgment describes that system.

Is the UAE now a reliable place to enforce a foreign arbitral award?

On the Dubai authorities, yes. Each of the three objections that defeated foreign awards between 2013 and 2022 has been rejected in a 2025 Cassation judgment. The court has also stated plainly that the Convention, and not the domestic rules on foreign judgments, sets the conditions.

Two cautions remain. UAE courts do not follow binding precedent in the common law sense, so a later panel could depart from these decisions. And arbitrability and public policy still allow a court to refuse where the dispute touches matters the law reserves to itself.

The choice of seat and institution made at contract stage decides much of what follows. Our guide to choosing a UAE arbitration clause covers that decision. Legal advice may be required to assess how enforcement would proceed against a particular debtor and its assets.

‍