Author: Mohamed Sheharan 

The United Arab Emirates continues to strengthen its position as a modern, arbitration-friendly jurisdiction. Both the legislature and the mainland courts have adopted a clear pro-arbitration approach, responding to the growing reliance on arbitration clauses in commercial agreements and the need to avoid the uncertainty and delay associated with court litigation.

The issuance of Federal Decree–Law No. 15 of 2023, amending certain provisions of Federal Law No. 6 of 2018 on Arbitration, introduced several technical yet important reforms. These include enhanced arbitrator independence, express recognition of virtual hearings, institutional obligations to provide technological support, and greater procedural flexibility for arbitral tribunals - matters discussed in Part 1 of this series.

Over the past year, the UAE’s arbitration landscape has continued to evolve at pace. One of the most significant developments is the ruling of the Dubai Court of Cassation in Case No. 657 of 2025, which reaffirmed the independence of arbitral tribunals, confirmed their autonomy in conducting proceedings, and recognised their authority to issue interim measures such as anti-suit injunctions.

Arbitral tribunals’ power to block parallel proceedings – anti-suit injunctions

For arbitral proceedings to remain effective, tribunals must have the authority to preserve the integrity of the process and prevent conduct that may undermine it. One longstanding challenge across jurisdictions is parties initiating parallel court proceedings to delay or disrupt arbitration.

A common remedy is the issuance of anti-suit injunctions, which restrain parties from commencing or continuing litigation before national courts. However, enforcing such injunctions has often been difficult, as courts in many jurisdictions are reluctant to accept that arbitral tribunals - which are not judicial bodies - can restrict a party’s right to approach the courts.

This issue recently came before the Dubai courts in Case No. 657 of 2025. The Dubai Court of Appeal had initially set aside an anti-suit injunction issued by an arbitral tribunal in an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration, finding that parties could not be prevented from filing or continuing judicial claims on the basis of an arbitral order.

The Dubai Court of Cassation, however, disagreed.

It held that the UAE legislator has expressly empowered arbitral tribunals to issue interim or precautionary measures. Under Article 21(e) of the UAE Arbitration Law, a tribunal may:

“Order an action to be taken in order to prevent current or imminent harm or prejudice to the arbitral process, or order to refrain from taking an action that may cause harm or prejudice the arbitral process.”

The Court reasoned that an anti-suit injunction does not deprive the respondent of the right to litigate or access judicial recourse. Instead, it temporarily preserves the integrity and independence of the arbitral proceedings. As such, an anti-suit injunction falls squarely within the scope of Article 21.

This ruling marks a major step in confirming the enforceability of anti-suit injunctions in the UAE.

Exclusive power of arbitral tribunals over interim measures

The Court also addressed the scope of a tribunal’s powers under Article 21(3) of the UAE Arbitration Law, which provides:

“The Arbitral Tribunal may amend, suspend or repeal an interim measure ordered thereby upon a request made by any party or at its own initiative in extraordinary cases and under a prior notice sent thereby to the parties.”

The Court held that this provision grants arbitral tribunals exclusive jurisdiction to amend, suspend, or revoke any interim measure they issue.

It emphasised that the legislator intended for this authority to rest solely with the tribunal, ensuring its independence and procedural control. The Court concluded that national courts may not intervene in such matters, nor may any other authority assume the power to alter or revoke interim or precautionary measures issued by an arbitral tribunal.

Impact on arbitration proceedings

The judgment in Case No. 657 of 2025 has several important implications:

1. Protection against parallel litigation

Tribunals may now confidently issue anti-suit injunctions to prevent parties from initiating or continuing disruptive court proceedings.

2. Reinforcement of tribunal autonomy

The confirmation that tribunals alone may amend, suspend, or repeal their interim measures strengthens procedural certainty and efficiency.

3. Increased confidence among international parties

The decision brings the UAE further in line with established arbitration jurisdictions such as London, Singapore, and Hong Kong, enhancing its attractiveness as a preferred seat.

4. Reliable and predictable framework

Although the UAE is not a case-law-based jurisdiction, this judgment provides strong persuasive authority that will guide future decisions and enhance confidence in the arbitration process.

Conclusion

The Dubai Court of Cassation’s ruling in Case No. 657 of 2025 represents a significant advancement in the UAE’s arbitration framework. By affirming the enforceability of anti-suit injunctions and reinforcing tribunals’ exclusive powers over interim measures, the Court has strengthened the integrity, efficiency, and autonomy of arbitral proceedings in the UAE.

These developments further support the UAE’s status as a modern, arbitration-friendly jurisdiction and provide businesses with a reliable and internationally aligned dispute resolution environment.

Note: This Legal Update / Newsletter is intended for general informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. It is based on laws and legal interpretations in effect as of the date of publication. Laws and regulations may change over time, and their application can vary depending on individual circumstances. Readers are strongly encouraged to seek specific legal counsel before acting on any of the information provided herein.