Dubai Court of Cassation Affirms Res Judicata in Orders Recognizing and Enforcing Foreign Arbitral Awards (7/10)

3 min 50 sec February 18, 2026 (Edited) الترجمة العربية

Written by

Dr. Hassan Arab

Partner, Regional Head of Dispute Resolution

h.arab@tamimi.com View LinkedIn Profile

Hend Al Mehairi

Associate

h.almehairi@tamimi.com View LinkedIn Profile

Dina Assar

Senior Knowledge Lawyer

d.assar@tamimi.com View LinkedIn Profile

Introduction:

In its judgment in Cassation No. 428 of 2025 Commercial, issued on 15 May 2025, the Dubai Court of Cassation confirmed the finality of foreign arbitral award recognition in the UAE. The Court affirmed that once a decision has been issued on the foreign arbitral award through a final court judgment under the New York Convention, that decision holds the authority of res judicata.

Based on that, a party cannot initiate a new substantive dispute to challenge the award’s validity or enforceability by raising arguments that could have been raised, or were raised and decided, in the recognition and enforcement proceedings.This judgment reinforces the UAE’s commitment to the New York Convention and strengthens the legal certainty surrounding the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.

Overview on the Dispute:

The dispute arose out of two aircraft lease agreements and the related guarantee contracts. The Appellant entered into two guarantee agreements in favour of the First Respondent, guaranteeing the obligations of a company in 2007.

Following the adverse impact of the global financial crisis on the aviation sector, the parties reached a settlement arrangement in 2010 providing for the termination of both lease agreements, the delivery of the aircraft to the First Respondent’s agent, and the payment of a specified amount.

Subsequently, the First Respondent obtained a foreign arbitral award issued by the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce against both the Appellant in his personal capacity and the company he represented, dated on 17 January 2014. The rights arising from this award were later assigned to the Second Respondent pursuant to an assignment of rights dated on 25 October 2020.

On the basis of that assignment, the Second Respondent commenced enforcement proceedings in Dubai, seeking to recover an amount exceeding AED 84.8 million from the Appellant and the company he represented.

The core of the present case lies in the fact that the foreign arbitral award had already been subject to recognition and enforcement proceedings in the UAE. Accordingly, the UAE courts had conclusively recognized the validity of the foreign arbitral award and its enforceability in the UAE.

Res Judicata Prevails in Attempts to Re-Challenge Foreign Award Enforcement:

Notwithstanding the issuance of final judicial rulings previously acknowledging the foreign arbitral award and granting it an enforcement order, the appellant subsequently instituted a new substantive execution challenge before the Dubai Court of First Instance (Commercial Execution), seeking to suspend the enforcement proceedings and annul the decision granting enforcement of the foreign arbitral award. The Execution Court dismissed the claim, and its judgment was upheld on appeal.

The appellant then filed a cassation appeal, alleging that the appealed judgment contravened the law and was flawed in its application, violated the New York Convention, asserted that the foreign arbitral award was unenforceable under U.S. law, contravened public order, and challenged the validity of the assignment of rights and the calculation of interest.

The Dubai Court of Cassation dismissed the appeal, affirming that, pursuant to Article 87 of the Law of Evidence in Civil and Commercial Transactions of 2022, judgments that have acquired the authority of res judicata constitute conclusive proof as to the rights decided therein. Accordingly, no evidence may be admitted to rebut this presumption by re-litigating a dispute that has already been adjudicated, save through the legally prescribed methods of appeal against judgments.

The Court’s Reasoning:

The Court of Cassation’s reasoning was grounded in the legal principle of res judicata.

The Court confirmed that the prior judicial proceedings, which culminated in a final cassation judgment in 2021, had already affirmed the validity of the arbitral award and its enforceability pursuant to the New York Convention. The Court further explained that the United Arab Emirates’ accession to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, by virtue of Federal Decree No. 43 of 2006, renders the Convention binding legislation and enforceable domestic law within the UAE. Accordingly, courts are required to apply its provisions to all disputes relating to the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in accordance with the applicable procedural rules, and a request for recognition or enforcement may not be refused unless one of the exhaustively listed grounds set out in Article V of the Convention is established.

Since the foreign arbitral award had already been examined in light of these criteria and was the subject of a final judicial ruling that satisfied all its legal requirements, its validity and enforceability were conclusively established. In light of this, the Court concluded that the appellant’s initiation of a new substantive execution challenge amounted to an impermissible appeal against a final judgment vested with the authority of res judicata and was therefore inadmissible.