On 4 June 2024, the Dubai Court of Cassation upheld a ruling to enforce the final judgment issued by the Regional Court of Ontario, Canada, in Case No. (CV-17-575025). The original ruling was made on 23 November 2020, and amended on 29 December 2021. This judgment also confirmed a decision from 15 May 2012, recognising the rehabilitation judgment issued by the District Court in the Eastern District of New York, USA, on 15 May 2021, and enforcing it as if it were issued by that court. The appellant is required to pay $14,643,427 USD (or the equivalent in Canadian dollars) to the appellee, plus $30,000 CAD for fees and interest. The interest on the first amount is set at 0.18% annually from 31 December 2020, and legal interest on the second amount at 2% annually from the same date.
The Dubai Court of Cassation ruled to overturn the contested appellate decision, which had previously refused to implement a foreign judgment. This decision came after the case was referred back to the court for the second time and addressed in accordance with Paragraph (C) of Article 19 of Law No. 13 of 2016 concerning the judicial authority in Dubai. The court upheld the enforcement judge's decision, confirming that the ruling could be implemented in the United Arab Emirates. The court clarified that the jurisdiction of UAE national courts regarding foreign judgments is limited to ordering their implementation according to the specific conditions outlined in Article 85 of Cabinet Resolution No. 57 of 2018, which pertains to the regulations of Law No. 11 of 1992 regarding the Civil Procedure Code. This article was later replaced by Article No. 222 of Civil Procedure Law No. 42 of 2021. The court emphasized that there is no room for discretion or interpretation when the text is clear and unambiguous, it is also established that if the text is general and absolute, there is no need for further specification or restriction through interpretation. The article explicitly states that the order to establish the executive formula is not limited to accepting the implementation of judgments issued by a foreign country, but also extends to orders issued by it. As long as the conditions outlined in Article 222 are met, the type or description of the ruling or order does not matter. The legislator has broadened the concept of executive bonds according to Article 75 (2) of Cabinet Resolution No. 57 of 2018, which corresponds to Article 212 (2) of the Civil Procedure Code. This now includes penal provisions related to restitution, compensation, fines, and other civil rights, unlike the previous Law No. 11 of 1992 regarding the Civil Procedure Code before it was amended by the aforementioned decision, which did not consider those judgments as document Enforcement.
The appealed ruling had cancelled the decision to impose an executive formula on the judgment in question, rejecting the order on the grounds that the ruling to be implemented was an urgent one recognising a judgment issued by the United States, which could only be implemented in the country that issued it. However, Article 85 of Cabinet Resolution No. 57 of 2018, corresponding to Article 222 of Civil Procedure Law No. 42 of 2022, is general and absolute, covering all judgments issued by a foreign country without specifying the type or description of the judgment, as long as it fulfils all the conditions contained therein, Additionally, the documents submitted under the Canadian Civil Procedure Code and its Regulation No. 194 demonstrate that Canadian law provides for a Summary Judgment system for issuing summary procedures. It was established that the ruling to be implemented was issued in accordance with these summary procedures, with the respondent participating by submitting follow-up memorandums and after witnesses were heard.
It is worth noting that the ruling to be implemented in the United Arab Emirates is issued by the Canadian courts and consists of two parts. The first part is the recognition of the rehabilitation ruling issued by the courts of the United States and its implementation as a ruling by the Canadian courts. The second part obliges the defendant to pay financial sums.
Additionally, I have had the honour of implementing the first foreign judgment issued by the local courts in England within the United Arab Emirates. This is the third judicial precedent I have achieved in the UAE, which has opened the door to implementing foreign judgments in the country. To learn more about this ruling, please click here.
