UAE Authority issues decision settling the debate over signatures on arbitral awards

As those familiar with arbitration in the UAE will know, historically, there was an understanding that arbitral awards issued in a Dubai-seated arbitration, or awards to be enforced in Dubai, needed to be signed on every page in order to be valid and enforceable.  Accordingly, a failure to do so became a first line of attack in annulment proceedings even though this apparent requirement was not expressly contained in Dubai or other UAE legislation.

Conversely, other Emirates adopted a different position.  In particular, the Ras Al-Khaimah Court of Cassation considered that there was no requirement for arbitrators to sign all pages, and this view was frequently adopted by the Abu Dhabi Court of Cassation.

These different approaches led to uncertainty as regards the requirements for issuing a valid award under the UAE Arbitration Law (Federal Law No. 6 of 2018).

However, the position on what signatures are required has now been resolved following the Authority for Unification of Federal and Local Judicial Principles (the "Authority") issuing its Decision No. 1 of 2025 on 4 August 2025 ("Decision No. 1").

The Dubai Court's approach

The position adopted by the Dubai Court of Cassation arose prior to the enactment of the UAE Arbitration Law, as a result of the requirements of Article 212 of the old UAE Civil Procedure Law (Federal Law No. (11) of 1992), which required an award to contain the signature of the arbitrators.  While the old UAE Civil Procedure Law did not expressly require a signature on all pages, the Dubai Court of Cassation had repeatedly held that a failure to do so would render the award invalid.

When the UAE Arbitration Law was issued in 2018, it also did not expressly require the arbitral tribunal’s signature on every page of the award.  However, since the language in the UAE Arbitration Law is similar to that under the old UAE Civil Procedure Law, the Court of Cassation maintained that awards needed to be signed on every page.

In particular, Decision No. 1 refers to Dubai Court of Cassation Case No. 403 of 2020, in which the Court of Cassation explains its reasoning for rejecting the enforcement of an arbitral award that had been signed on the last page only.  The basis for the court's decision was that Article 41 of the UAE Arbitration Law requires that an award needs to be signed by the arbitrator(s), and the signature constitutes the sole legal proof that the arbitrator(s) authored the award.  As such, without a signature, the award cannot be attributed to the arbitrator(s), and the intent of requiring a signature is not fulfilled when a signature only appears on the final page, as without a signature on each page, it is not clear that the entire award was authored by the arbitrator(s).  This reasoning was affirmed in a number of cases in the Dubai Court of Cassation between 2020 and 2023.  The Decision also notes that the Abu Dhabi Court of Cassation adopted similar reasoning in Case No. 844 of 2022.

The Ras Al-Khaimah Court's approach

By contrast, the Ras Al-Khaimah Court of Cassation, in Case No. 5 of 2024, held that it was sufficient for the arbitrator(s) to sign the last page of an award only, as such a signature satisfies the requirements of Article 41 and the conditions for enforcement.  Moreover, the court said that a requirement to sign all pages does not fall within any of the recognised grounds for refusing enforcement, and that the New York Convention does not contain a provision equivalent to Article 41.

Decision No. 1 noted that this approach was supported by the judgment of the Abu Dhabi Court of Cassation in Case No. 834 of 2010, where it was established that, in principle, an arbitrator is not bound by the litigation procedures applicable to courts.  Rather, an arbitrator should follow the relevant procedures set out in the arbitration chapter of the law, as well as any specific procedures agreed by the parties.  Further, the court stated that the annulment of an award on procedural grounds is confined to breaches of fundamental principles of litigation or breaches of agreed procedures, and the requirement to sign all pages of the award is not one of these procedures (which even the old UAE Civil Procedures Law did not expressly require).

The Authority's decision

Having considered the different approaches adopted by the Dubai, Ras Al-Khaimah and Abu Dhabi Courts, together with the relevant provisions of the UAE Civil Procedure Law, UAE Arbitration Law and the New York Convention, the Authority adopted the more liberal approach and overruled the Dubai court's approach of requiring each page to be signed.  In particular, it said that:

• An arbitral award is compliant with Article 41 of the UAE Arbitration Law, and therefore valid and enforceable, if it has the signatures of all arbitrators (or the majority) on the final page of the written award.
• Neither Article 41 of the UAE Arbitration Law, nor any provision of the UAE Civil Procedure Law, requires that each page is signed.
• The New York Convention does not require that each page is signed.
• The failure to sign every page does not amount to a ground for annulment under the UAE Arbitration Law, a breach of UAE public order, nor does it prejudice the parties' rights.
• The spirit of arbitration is to avoid the excessive formality of litigation, and an unduly formal approach would run counter to the efficacy of the arbitration process.

Comment

Decision No. 1 is a welcome clarification and further enhances the UAE's reputation as an arbitration-friendly jurisdiction.  Parties can take comfort in the fact that they do not have to ensure that every page of an award is signed, especially if they are likely to need to enforce in Dubai or the wider UAE, removing the risk of a potentially fatal procedural issue.

Moreover, the existence of the Authority is clearly of great benefit to the UAE.  As a federal system containing a number of Emirate level court systems, it is unsurprising that, over time, the different courts will reach different decisions on similar issues.  As such, having an overarching authority to review any divergent views and determine a UAE-wide position is a shrewd step in enhancing and harmonising the country's dispute resolution landscape in a pro-arbitration direction.

In addition, Decision No. 1 suggests that the Authority is taking an efficient rather than overly formal approach to the issues it is asked to decide, which is encouraging, particularly for parties looking to arbitrate in the UAE.  This also bodes well for future decisions on issues that the Authority will no doubt be asked to consider.