This month we bring you a special focus on a continent that boasts the world’s largest free trade area, a diverse economic make-up and increasing political stability. The latest edition of Law Update focuses on Africa, a territory that continues to be an attractive business and investment destination.
Like the rest of the world, Africa is still re-building from the impact of COVID-19, however, there continues to be an optimistic view of the opportunities the continent presents. An example of the appetite for investment into Africa was captured in a report we commissioned, titled Legal Leaders in MENA. Our survey of legal leaders revealed a resounding desire to expand into new territories, with 81% naming Africa as their investment destination of choice.Read the full edition
Mohammed Al Marri
An award issued by a Qatari Arbitration Centre obliged the Plaintiff to pay to the Defendant more than QAR 8m. (Note that the Arabic text of the law makes no distinction between the words “award” and “judgment”).
The Case at First Instance
In 2010, the Plaintiff filed a civil case with the Court of First Instance in Qatar, seeking to nullify the validity of the impugned award.
In 2011, the Court of First Instance rejected the Plaintiff’s case.
Ruling of the Court of Appeal
Later in 2011, the Plaintiff brought the decision of the Court of First Instance before the Court of Appeal. But nonetheless, in a Judgment delivered in January 2012, the Court of Appeal affirmed the finding of the Court of First Instance.
Judgment of the Court of Cassation
In March 2012, the Plaintiff lodged a further appeal with the Court of Cassation, seeking to nullify the validity of the impugned award.
The Court of Cassation’s Decision
In justifying the necessity of rendering any arbitral award in the name of H.H. the Emir of Qatar, the Supreme Court reasoned as follows:
In the light of the foregoing, The Court of Cassation overturned the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
This Judgment is only related to awards issued in Qatar. Since the said Judgment is issued by the highest court (Court Cassation), all the lower courts will probably follow same although in theory they are not obliged to do so.
This Judgment is extremely controversial, therefore, we will shortly issue an article to analyse and comment on the legal reasons and effects.
Al Tamimi & Co. did not provide legal representation to any of the parties in the course of this litigation.