Dispute resolution in the United Arab Emirates: what are the options? Part one
By Alex Freeman
Following the Dubai International Finance Centre (DIFC) court judgment in Banyan Tree Corporate PTE Ltd v Meydan Group LLC, parties operating within Dubai and the wider United Arab Emirates (UAE) have been forced to reconsider their approach to dispute resolution and, in particular, to selecting the most appropriate forum in dispute resolution clauses.
The Banyan Tree case confirmed the extent of the DIFC court’s jurisdiction to recognise arbitral awards — a ruling that could save a party up to two years in court where enforcement of an award is necessary.
In this three-part series, our international construction disputes team considers the options open to those involved with projects in the region and the potential impact of this decision. Here, in part one, we look at the issue of getting dispute resolution clauses right, thinking about the laws that should apply to any dispute and a brief overview of the court options available…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co briefing.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co
Ruling on an application for specific disclosure could have big implications in the early stages of procurement disputes.
Hospira v Genentech III: Swiss form claim obvious in view of paper reporting the existence of Phase III trial
Arnold J has delivered the latest blow in the ongoing saga surrounding trastuzumab (the monoclonal antibody in Herceptin) and Hospira’s continued efforts to knock out Genentech’s patents.