UK: Good Faith: English Law v The UAE Civil Code

Last Updated: 26 January 2015

Article by Claire King1


The reluctance of English common law to imply a term of good faith into agreements negotiated between two commercial parties at arm's length is well known and is based on the long-established doctrine of freedom of contract. In stark contrast in civil law countries such as the United Arab Emirates, performing obligations in a manner consistent with good faith is a fundamental part of the contract.

A series of English cases on good faith in early 2013 had raised the prospect that the English courts may be on their way to recognising an overarching duty of good faith but this prospect now seems to have receded. This article provides an update on the latest position under English law whilst highlighting the contrasting position under the UAE Civil Code. Those working with construction standard forms internationally need to keep these very real differences in mind as they can have a significant impact on how some provisions operate in practice.

English case law on good faith: the latest position

The early 2013 case of Yam Seng Pte Ltd v International Trade Corporation Limited ("ITC")2 involved a long-term distribution agreement for fragrances produced by ITC bearing the name "Manchester United". The court adopted a fairly broad and purposive approach regarding the circumstances in which good faith obligations might be implied, raising expectations that the courts were open to an overarching duty of good faith being implied more widely.

In that case Yam Seng (the distributor) argued there was an implied term that the parties would deal with each other in good faith and, specifically, that ITC had: (i) failed to act with an implied obligation of good faith and prejudiced Yam Seng's sales by offering the same products for domestic sale below the duty free prices that Yam Seng was permitted to offer; (ii) instructed or encouraged Yam Seng to incur marketing expenses for products that ITC was unable or unwilling to supply; and (iii) offered false information upon which Yam Seng relied to its detriment. There were no express terms of the contract covering any of these points.

Leggatt J noted: "The content of the duty of good faith is established by a process of construction which in English law is based upon an objective principle. The Court is concerned not with the subjective intentions of the parties ..."

On the facts, only two obligations were implied. First, the court found there was an obligation not to undercut duty free prices, and secondly, there was an obligation not to knowingly provide false information; a duty of good faith was implied in both these respects. The first obligation was contrary to usual standards of commercial dealing and the second was implied into the agreement between the parties as a matter of fact.

The fact that the contract was a long-term distributorship agreement which, the court noted, required the parties to communicate effectively and cooperate with each other in its performance, appears to have influenced the result. The state of the contract, which had not been drafted by lawyers also appears to have swayed the Court.

In stark contrast, the Court of Appeal took a much narrower and restrictive approach in Compass Group UK and Ireland Ltd v Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust.3 This also involved a long-term contract for catering services.

The issue was whether the Trust was entitled to terminate the contract on the basis that Compass had exceeded the number of Service Failure Points allowed in any given six-month rolling period.

This contract contained an express duty to cooperate in good faith "as is necessary for the efficient transmission of information and instructions and to enable the Trust or, as the case may be, any Beneficiary to derive the full benefit of the Contract". 4

The question before the court was whether this clause provided an overarching obligation on the parties to operate with each other in good faith. The Court of Appeal held that whilst there was an obligation to act in good faith it was specifically focused on the obligation to take all reasonable action as was necessary for the efficient communication of information and instructions. There was nothing that required the parties to act in good faith in relation to anything else.

Overturning the first instance decision,5 the court held that commercial common sense did not favour the addition of an overarching duty to cooperate in good faith in circumstances where good faith had been provided for in the contract in such a precise manner already.

Applying this reasoning to the facts of the case, the Court of Appeal considered that the Trust was not prevented from awarding service failure points for failures in performance. The contract expressly contained precise rules for these matters and the ability of the Trust to impose service failure points for poor performance was an absolute contractual right: "if the parties want to impose such a duty they must do so expressly".

The issue of good faith was further considered in TSG Building Services plc v South Anglia Housing Ltd ("SAH")6 in May 2013 in relation to an ACA Standard Form of Contract for Term Partnering.7

Clause 1.1 of the contract provided:

"The Partnering Team members shall work together and individually in the spirit of trust, fairness and mutual cooperation for the benefit of the Term Programme . . . and in all matters governed by the Partnering Contract they shall act reasonably and without delay."

The contract contained an "unqualified and unconditional right to terminate" at any time (i.e. termination for convenience).

SAH terminated the contract and TSG argued that the termination was wrongful and in breach of clause 1.1. The issue the court had to decide was whether the good faith clause was pervasive such that it applied to the whole contract and therefore to the termination provisions.

The court accepted that, in principle, an express obligation to act in good faith could be pervasive and, depending on the nature and drafting of the clause, it may be possible for it to affect all aspects of the contract.

However, the court held that this was not the case here. The contract contained an unqualified right to terminate for convenience, to which the obligation to act in good faith could not possibly extend. The entitlement to terminate the contract was absolute. Each party was entitled to terminate at any time. Further, clause 1.1 primarily related to the assumption, deployment and performance of roles, expertise and responsibilities set out in the Partnering Documents.

In the later 2014 case of Bluewater Energy Services BV v (1) Mercon Steel Structures BV and others,8 Ramsey J examined again the impact of a good faith provision in the context of termination.

That contract provided for a notice of default to be issued to the subcontractor requiring them to "immediately commence and thereafter continuously proceed with action satisfactory to Bluewater to remedy such default". If they did not do so, a notice of termination could then be issued.

The subcontract also provided that the parties "shall uphold the highest standards of business ethics in the performance of the contract. Honesty, fairness and integrity shall be paramount principles in the dealings between the parties."

Ramsey J referred to the Court of Appeal decision in Socimer International Bank Ltd (in liquidation) v Standard Bank London Ltd,9which related to the standard to be applied in circumstances where the valuation of assets was left entirely in one party's hands. In that case it was held that a decision-maker's discretion will be limited, as a matter of necessary implication, by concepts of honest good faith and genuineness and the need for the absence of arbitrariness, capriciousness, perverseness and irrationality. However, the decision remained with the decision-maker and was therefore subjective.

Ramsey J decided that the same standard applied in these circumstances and was not impacted by the express clause in the contract although that clause was consistent with it. He went on to find that termination had been justified on four of the five main grounds alleged in the contractor's notice of default.10


It seems then that the English courts are not ready to imply a general doctrine of good faith. The judgment of the High Court in Yam Seng appears to have been sidelined (if not directly overruled) by the Court of Appeal and subsequent cases.

If the parties want to have an express duty of good faith they need to create one and they should think very carefully about its scope. The English courts will not allow good faith-type wording to overrule an absolute contractual right such as the right to terminate for convenience. The parties will need to expressly provide that a good faith obligation operates in relation to such a provision.

The situation might, however, be different if there was evidence to suggest a breach of an express good faith obligation in circumstanceswhere there was a discretionary right (for example awarding a discretionary bonus to an employee). In those circumstances a decisionmaker's discretion will be limited, as a matter of necessary implication, by concepts of honest good faith and genuineness and the need for the absence of arbitrariness, capriciousness, perverseness and irrationality.

Good faith in UAE contracts

In stark contrast, a duty to act in good faith is implied into all contracts that are subject to UAE law. This is underscored by principles of fairness developed under Sharia law.

Article 246 of the UAE Civil Code provides that:

"a contract must be performed in accordance with its contents, and in a manner consistent with the requirements of good faith".

This in effect is a requirement not to use the terms of a contract to abuse the rights of the other contracting party, not to cause unjustified damage to the other party and to act reasonably and moderately.

Decisions of the Dubai Court of Cassation have ruled that an act of bad faith by one contracting party may provide a cause of action for the other and the duty of good faith is therefore overarching, unlike at English law. In deciding whether an act constitutes bad faith the court may also look at Article 106 of the UAE Civil Code which provides that a party is prohibited from exercising its rights if:

  • it is intended to infringe the rights of another party;
  • the outcome is contrary to the rules of Islamic Sharia, the law, public order, or morals;
  • the desired gain is disproportionate to the harm that will be suffered by the other party; or
  • it exceeds the bounds of custom or practice.
  • There are some potentially wide-ranging ramifications of this including:
  • Good faith is most likely to be applied to evidence for, or to support, an allegation of breach. Where, for example, building materials are found to be defective a breach will be easier to establish if there has been some attempt to conceal this or cover up the materials once incorporated into the works.
  • Reliance on a time bar notice (e.g. FIDIC's clause 20.1) is likely to be restricted where a party seeking to rely on it knew about that breach previously (for example, if notification of the claim was made informally and is recorded in meeting minutes or similar but was never formally made). In other words, denying a claim due to the time bar when it had already been communicated, albeit informally, would be an act of bad faith.
  • Avoiding liability for a very substantial claim due to a time bar may also be unlawful where the losses were serious and unequal with the employer's contractual claim to be notified in a required time period (for example 28 days under clause 20.1 of FIDIC). Article 106 (1) of the UAE Civil Code provides that "a person shall be held liable for an unlawful exercise of his rights" and this, together with the good faith obligation, may be used to challenge the effectiveness of a time bar in such circumstances.
  • Whilst the UAE Civil Code does provide that parties may fix a pre-agreed compensation mechanism or amount in their contract, the court may also vary the pre-agreed amount of compensation or damages to equal the actual loss in any event, regardless of whether there was any "act of prevention" on the part of the employer.11
  • Good faith is also applicable in relation to termination for convenience clauses although it is worth noting that the duty of good faith is not applicable to the obligation itself but to the performance of the obligation. Accordingly the parties' agreement that the employer may terminate the contract for convenience is a valid agreement and the UAE courts will normally uphold this. Although this employer's right might be looked at as contradicting the good faith principle, it would be an enforceable contract term as it was freely entered into. However, if the employer relies on this contract provision to terminate the contract in circumstances that give rise to performing the contract in a manner that is inconsistent with good faith, then the court might have a different view. For example, if the contract provides for termination for convenience and limits the liability of the employer to compensate the contractor for the work done until the date of termination, but excluding mobilisation cost, the employer who terminates the contract for convenience immediately after mobilisation and before the contractor has done any work is performing the contract in bad faith. In this case, the contractor might rely on Articles 246 (good faith), 106 (abuse of right) and 390(2) (claiming actual loss) of the UAE Civil Code to recoup its losses.


The stark contrast between the position regarding good faith under English law and that under the UAE Civil Code remains in place. This may make a real difference with regard to how some standard provisions in construction contracts are interpreted. As outlined above, the same time bar and termination for convenience provisions may result in very different outcomes on similar facts, depending on how the governing law approaches the issue of good faith.


1. With thanks to Lisa Kingston of Fenwick Elliott for her great assistance in preparing this paper and Ahmed Ibrahim of Ahmed Ibrahim Advocates and Legal Consultants for his assistance in relation to the position under UAE Law.

2. [2013] EWHC 111 (QB) (February 2013)

3. [2013] EWCA Civ 200 (March 2013).

4. Clause 3.5 of the contract.

5. At first instance the High Court ruled that the Trust had abused its contractual powers in relation to the service credits and breached the express provision of Clause 3.5. It further held that the Trust had acted capriciously and irrationally in the way in which it deducted out the credits (e.g. deducting £84,540 for one day out of date chocolate mousse).

6. [2013] EWHC 1151 (TCC).

7. TPC 2005 as amended in 2008.

8. (2) Mercon Holding BV; (3) Mercon Groep BV [2014] EWHC 2132 (TCC).

9. [2008] EWCA Civ 116

10. In the Compass case, Jackson LJ had rejected such an implied term on the grounds that the term in question was an absolute contractual right and not one which could be exercised with discretion

International Quarterly is produced quartely by Fenwick Elliott LLP, the leading specialist construction law firm in the UK, working with clients in the building, engineering and energy sectors throughout the world.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Goodman Derrick LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Goodman Derrick LLP
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions