Dubai Law No. 2 of 2025 (the 2025 Law), effective as of 14 March 2025 following its publication in the Official Gazette, introduces significant changes to the jurisdiction of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts. This new law supersedes both Dubai Law No. 12 of 2004 (the JAL) and DIFC Law No. 10 of 2004 (the Courts Law).
Under the previous framework, DIFC jurisdiction was determined by Article 5(a) of the JAL and Article 19 of the Courts Law. With the enactment of the 2025 Law, the DIFC Courts’ jurisdiction is now governed by this new legislation. Notably, the 2025 Law allows the DIFC Courts to hear cases that are not directly connected to the DIFC, provided that both parties consent in writing to resolve their dispute within the DIFC Courts.
This summary highlights the major provisions of the 2025 Law, including the establishment of a Mediation Centre, expanded jurisdiction over arbitral award recognition, new powers for interim relief, enhanced enforcement mechanisms, and stricter contempt provisions.
Article 13
Establishes the Mediation Centre within the DIFC Courts, notably its governance is determined by the President of the DIFC, rather than the judiciary or Registry.
Article 30(b)(4) provides that settlement agreements approved by the mediation centre will be subject to compulsory enforcement.
Article 14
The most notable change in the 2025 Law is the expansion of the DIFC Courts’ jurisdiction, Article 14 contains a general provision dealing with subject-matter jurisdiction that applies to all Courts in the DIFC (the Small Claims Tribunal, Courts of First Instance, and the Court of Appeal) and that encompasses civil, commercial, and employment claims. This makes it easier to identify matters that fall within the jurisdiction of the DIFC Courts and to distinguish such matters from those that fall under the jurisdiction of Dubai’s onshore courts.
The DIFC Courts have exclusive jurisdiction to hear all claims and applications related to the ratification or recognition of arbitral awards (domestic and foreign) in accordance with the DIFC Arbitration Law.
Article 15
15(4) codifies the DIFC Court of Appeal (CA) recent ruling in Carmon Reestrutura-Engenharia E Serviços Técnios Especiais, (SU) LDA v Antonio Joao Catete Lopes Cuenda [2024] DIFC CA 003, confirming its authority to grant interim relief in support of foreign proceedings.
Article 15 also grants the DIFC Courts jurisdiction to decide applications seeking interim or precautionary measures related to the following:
- the disclosure of the true identity of defendants or potential defendants against whom a claim may be brought in the DIFC Courts; and
- the disclosure of funds and assets owned by the defendant or applicant in applications and claims that fall within the DIFC Courts’ jurisdiction.
Article 17
17(a) allows for five-judge panels in exceptional cases, reducing the risk of conflicting decisions by different three-judge benches. Although the 2025 Law does not define the parameters of an “exceptional” case, it is likely to include cases which consider fundamental aspects of the DIFC Courts’ jurisdiction.
17(c) grants the CA exclusive authority to interpret DIFC laws and regulations upon application by a DIFC body or establishment, with interpretations carrying the same authority as the legislation itself.
Article 23
Formally enshrines the principle that DIFC law applies by default unless otherwise provided or agreed.
Article 24
This Article provides the DIFC Court with powers related to legal proceedings, the DIFC Courts may appoint:
- assessors (one or more), who are required to be independent and qualified, to “assist the DIFC Court in the determination of any of the issues arising in a proceeding before the DIFC Courts”; and/or
- receivers and provisional liquidators who may be provided “with any powers… necessary” in the eyes of the Court.
Article 28
The default six-year limitation period is now explicitly stated in Article 28, reinforcing arguments that limitation is procedural.
Article 30
Enforcement now requires an ‘enforcement writ’, applicable to judgments, ratified arbitral awards, and court-approved settlement agreements. This expansion mirrors the provision of the Singapore Convention on Mediation.
Article 32
Affirms the “conduit” jurisdiction, mirroring the JAL, while clarifying that the Dubai Courts cannot review the merits of DIFC enforcement orders. Enforcement remains subject to the UAE Civil Procedure Code.
Article 35
Establishes penalty fines for contempt of court before the DIFC Courts. These fines apply to actions such as intentionally insulting Court members, disrupting proceedings, engaging in other forms of misconduct, knowingly presenting fraudulent evidence, damaging Court property, disregarding a Court judgment or order, and insulting or defaming DIFC Court staff on social media. Given the broad scope of these provisions, and the relatively low threshold for some offenses, it is important to be mindful of them when engaging with the DIFC Courts and their rulings. Despite its expansion, the new article does not alter the fundamental principle that, unlike in other common law jurisdictions, the Court does not impose criminal penalties or imprisonment for contempt.
Conclusion
The 2025 Law is a welcomed development for the DIFC Courts and provides much clarity as to the Courts powers and jurisdiction. The 2025 Law highlights the DIFC Courts’ alignment with the approach of other common law jurisdictions, offering companies and individuals seeking an English-language common law court system the ability to resolve their disputes in Dubai.
