50 Enforcement Updates Under the New UAE Civil Procedure Regulations


A roundup of the 50 most crucial additions, amendments, and deletions to the Civil Procedures Law No. 11 of 1992 that were promulgated pursuant to Cabinet Decision No. 57 of 2018 that came into effect in early 2019:

1. Approving the designation of execution officers instead of representatives and adding the possibility of execution by private companies and offices.

2. Deletion of the description of “provisional” in execution matters, which the judge of execution is competent to adjudicate.

3. Linking the jurisdiction of the execution judge to the court that issued the writ of execution.

4. Granting the execution judge the power to take direct action in the jurisdiction of the courts of the other State or to delegate the execution judge thereof.

5. Expansion of the field of delegation to include explicitly all implementation procedures (instead of provisional procedures and declarations).

6. Explicitly provide for the possibility of electronic delegation.

7. Explicitly stipulate the possibility of combining execution files pending before the execution judges of different courts.

8. Granting the execution judge the power to initiate imprisonment proceedings, even when the debtor’s domicile is within the jurisdiction of the courts of the other State.

9. Addition of provision for grievance against the decisions of the execution judge. The decisions of the execution judge shall be subject to appeal in any of the following cases:

a. Order of preference among convicts.

b. Postponement of execution for any reason.

c. To provide the debtor a time limit to pay or install the amount for which it is executed.

d. Acceptance of guarantee.

e. Travel ban.

f. Seize and arrest order.

10. The grievance shall be filed with the President of the Court or his authorized representative within seven days from the day following the date of issuance in respect of the person in whose presence the procedure is issued, and from the date of notification in respect of the person who issued the procedure in his absence, pursuant to a request filed in the same execution file. Cancellation or amendment of the grievance decision may occur in absentia. The decision of the appeal shall be final and not subject to appeal.

11. Explicitly stating that judgments and orders that are considered writs of the criminal court in restitution, compensation, fines and others, are considered writs of civil rights.

12. To grant the execution judge the competence to order the execution of foreign judgments and orders, within a maximum of three days from the date of submission of the petition, with his order considered as subject to appeal in accordance with the rules and procedures established for the appeal of judgments.

13. Granting the execution judge the power to complete the supporting documents before issuing his decision.

14. Addition of an exclusive description of the non-competence of the courts of the UAE.

15. Granting the execution judge the competence to order the execution of the notarized documents and conciliation minutes approved by the courts in a foreign country, in accordance with the same procedures and conditions for ordering the execution of foreign judgments and orders.

16. Deletion of the term “paper” from the notification provisions to suit e-litigation.

17. Granting the execution judge, prior to the execution of the execution order against the executor against him, the authority to order the provisional seizure of the movable and the real estate and the seizure of the debtor with others, and to inquire about the debtor’s property.

18. Authorization of the execution procedure by breaking the doors or forcibly opening the locks by the executor even if he is not the court execution representative.

19. Lessening the threshold to prove the presence of a member of the police, to avoid invalidity, even if the police officer did not sign the minutes.

20. Reduction of the period of implementation from third parties to 7 days from the date of the notification, instead of 8 days.

21. Excluding the house (or common share) mortgaged to guarantee a debt arising from its price from the principle that the debtor’s home may not be sold.

22. Explicitly stating that no more than a quarter of the wage or salary may be enforced against even if transferred to a bank account.

23. Explicitly stating that funds of embassies and bodies enjoying diplomatic immunity may not be seized (with the condition of reciprocity being present).

24. Addition of the explicit provision for the requirement of thorough evidence justifying the fear of the flight of the debtor or the smuggling of its property, so that it can be adopted as a ground for provisional detention.

25. Addition of the explicit provision to add the case of the worker whose settlement of the entitlements could not be settled, after provisionally assessed by the competent administrative authority, to cases of preventive detention.

26. Addition of the power to conduct the necessary investigation or investigations with the assistance of the competent administrative authorities, to the judge (or court) who adjudicates the request for provisional detention.

27. Adoption of the date of issuance of the attachment order for the validity of the filing of the substantive claim, instead of the date of the attachment.

28. Explicitly stipulate that the detention order may be appealed to the urgent matters judge and before the court hearing the right before filing the attachment.

29. Explicitly stipulating the expiry of the attachment by the issuance of a final ruling rejecting the substantive claim.

30. Explicitly permitting the attachment of the movables or debts of the debtor to others, even if they are subject to dispute.

31. Explicitly stipulating that attachments may be made by electronic or paper minutes.

32. Permitting the sale of movables that have been attached to a specific buyer at the request of the debtor and the consent of the creditor.

33. Adding the authority of the judge of execution to initiate the sale procedures or lifting the seizure of if the creditor fails to proceed with the sale of the seizures within (30) days from the date of seizure.

34. Adding the authority of the judge of execution to reduce the price set to start selling the reserved movables by 5% five times and then selling at an estimated price, when the sale does not take place on the day specified.

35. ​​The addition of the use of telecommunications technology in the procedures of auctioning movables.

36. Adoption of notification of the decision of seizure of the property to the competent department of registration of real estate, instead of mandatory transfer of the representative of the execution the day after the issuance of the decision of seizure.

37. Requiring the department where the property is registered to inform the judge of execution directly (without the need to move the delegate in order to obtain an official statement).

38. Reduction of the time limit for declaring the heirs of a right holder to 3 months.

39. Granting the judge the power to request guarantees to defer the sale whenever the debtor had other income in addition to the property’s income sufficient to repay the debt in installments within three years.

40. Reduction of the maximum period for estimating the price of the property to 15 days instead of 30 days.

41. Addition of the explicit provision to exclude real estate that foreigners may own in the State in accordance with the laws in force from the condition that real estate may not be sold to non-citizens.

42. Explicitly stipulating that the sale of the property of the bankrupt shall be in accordance with the Bankruptcy Law, with the condition of informing the bankruptcy administration, and the provision of the role of the execution judge in approving it.

43. Explicitly stipulating that partial or total attribution of the execution of the seizure procedures and the sale of the seizures may be made to any natural or legal person in accordance with the rules and procedures that determine the mechanism of their work and for their fees.

44. Cancellation of the obligation to inform the obligor to vacate the property at the time of execution.

45. If the execution is not possible or the execution requires the debtor himself to do so, the execution judge may commit him to a daily fine of not less than AED 1,000 and not more than AED 10,000 to be paid as compensation to the executor. Provided that the total fines of the principal of the debt in force shall not exceed the original enforcement amount.

46. The execution judge shall have the right to cancel the fine, or part thereof, if the executor is against it.

47. The fine shall apply to the legal representative of the legal person or to any employee who personally obstructs the execution.

48. Explicitly stipulating the imprisonment of the debtor obliged to do or abstain from work.

49. Explicitly stipulating the permissibility of issuing travel bans or imprisonment against a person who refuses to execute a writ of execution issued against a legal person, whether he is a legal representative or otherwise.

50. Adding the removal of a travel ban order after the lapse of three years from the last valid procedure for the implementation of the final judgment of the debt issued by the said travel ban order, without the creditor applying for a continuation of the execution procedures.


Author

Mahmoud Abuwasel
Managing Partner | mabuwasel@waselandwasel.com

Mahmoud Abuwasel is a Harvard graduate practitioner with experience in North America and the MENA region, focusing on corporate, tax, and construction disputes.

He has represented leading HNW investors and multinationals across the globe in multi-billion-dollar litigation and arbitral proceedings, and is regularly published and interviewed in leading news outlets.

Mahmoud also serves as Vice-President of The Hague Institute for Global Justice in the Netherlands, and is Co-Chair of International Development of the Harvard Alumni Entrepreneurs.

Clients describe him as “being a quick thinker”, “an outstanding gentleman”, “a great professional lawyer”, “a master at his game”, and an “unstoppable force”.

Share this: