In a groundbreaking judgment rendered on 16 July 2025, the Dubai Court of Cassation has categorically recalibrated the legal identity and authority of the Centre for Amicable Settlement of Disputes, confirming—for the first time under the Emirate's new conciliation framework—that the Centre enjoys judicial competence for disputes within its statutory remit.
A Case that Redraws Procedural Boundaries
The case concerned Commercial Appeal No. 509/2025, initiated by the Dubai Public Prosecutor in the interest of legal uniformity, arising from a dispute between two private entities. The underlying claim involved the termination of a services agreement valued below AED 500,000—a threshold that places the matter squarely within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Centre for Amicable Settlement of Disputes, pursuant to Law No. 18 of 2021 and Resolution No. 4 of 2025 issued by the Chief Justice of the Dubai Courts.
In the course of proceedings before the Centre, the respondent submitted a defence memorandum dated 18 September 2023 addressing the merits of the dispute, without raising any jurisdictional objection based on the arbitration clause contained in the agreement. The Court of First Instance, upon referral, issued a judgment on the merits in favor of the claimant.
The jurisdictional objection was raised for the first time on appeal, where the Court of Appeal accepted the plea and ruled that the existence of an arbitration clause precluded the courts from hearing the matter, thereby ordering the dismissal of the case. In response, the Dubai Public Prosecutor filed a petition for cassation.
The Court of Cassation allowed the petition, holding that the respondent's failure to invoke the arbitration clause at the stage of proceedings before the Centre—while simultaneously engaging with the substance of the dispute—constituted an unequivocal waiver of the arbitration defence. The Court held that the Centre operates as a judicial body under Law No. 18 of 2021, and thus any failure to raise jurisdiction objections at that stage is procedurally fatal. The Court concluded that the appellate ruling had erred in law by overlooking the respondent's conduct and misapplying the legal framework governing arbitration pleas.
The Centre's Evolution: From Mediation Hub to Judicial Authority
Historically, the Centre operated as a pre-litigation conciliation body under Law No. 16 of 2009, its role confined to mediatory interventions devoid of adjudicatory powers. That understanding, long embedded in UAE procedural jurisprudence, has now been conclusively set aside.
With the enactment of Law No. 18 of 2021, a legislative shift occurred—quiet but profound. The new statute reengineered the Centre's mandate, integrating it into the judicial architecture and empowering designated judges stationed at the Centre to issue binding rulings within its jurisdictional scope. That scope includes, inter alia, civil and commercial disputes not exceeding AED 500,000, as well as specific categories enumerated by resolution.
Why This Matters: No More Second Chances for Delayed Arbitration Defences
The ramifications of this ruling are stark. Parties can no longer wait until court proceedings to invoke arbitration clauses—not where a matter has already been litigated on its merits before the Centre. Doing so constitutes a waiver of the arbitration defence, much like what occurs before any other court of competent jurisdiction.
In its reasoning, the Court relied on Article 8(1) of the UAE Arbitration Law (Federal Law No. 6 of 2018), which mandates that arbitration must be asserted before the first substantive defence ever being raised (i.e. before the merits are even addressed by the defendant). When the defendant in this case filed their response at the Centre without invoking the arbitral clause, this effectively extinguished their right to later challenge the court's jurisdiction during the stages of litigation that follow.
Furthermore, the Court emphasized that decisions issued by the Centre's judicial appointees, including dismissal of suits or final rulings, are subject to review or appeal, depending on the claim's value, thereby solidifying the Centre's standing as a legitimate judicial body—not merely a gatekeeper to litigation.
Arbitration Defences Must Now Be Timely and Tactical
A central feature of the Cassation Court's judgment was its firm reiteration of Article 8(1) of the UAE Arbitration Law (Federal Law No. 6 of 2018), which mandates that any plea invoking arbitration must be raised prior to the submission of the first substantive defence. The defendant's failure to do so at the Centre—where it had fully participated in the proceedings—was fatal to its jurisdictional objection.
The ruling sends a clear procedural warning: participation before the Centre, without contemporaneous invocation of the arbitration clause, is tantamount to waiver. It is a principle well-established in regular court practice, and now explicitly extended to the Centre's judicial activities.
Conclusion: Precision and Predictability for Litigants
The Dubai Cassation Court's ruling decisively elevates the Centre for Amicable Settlement of Disputes from an ancillary administrative step to a cornerstone of the UAE's judicial system. Parties must now approach the Centre not as a perfunctory hurdle, but as a court in its own right—where procedural discipline matters and jurisdictional defences must be raised with precision and foresight.
In reaffirming these standards, the Court has not merely clarified the law—it has codified a new procedural reality. The message to litigants is unmistakable: what is not timely asserted before the Centre, which is considered a judicial body, similar to the substantive courts, is, in law, deemed abandoned.
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.
