- within Accounting and Audit, Cannabis & Hemp, Food, Drugs, Healthcare and Life Sciences topic(s)
Dubai's highest court has ruled that settlements reached between muslim spouses before a judge cannot be challenged in higher courts. Legal experts state this confirms the finality of court-recorded agreements in personal status disputes.
The ruling clarifies that when parties in a muslim personal status dispute agree to settle their claims before the Court of First Instance, record the agreement and give it the force of an executive instrument, they cannot later challenge that settlement before the Court of Appeal or the Court of Cassation. The same principle applies to settlements reached before the Court of Appeal.
Legal Consultant Dr. Hassan Elhais, from Amal Al Rashedi Lawyers and Legal Consultants, said the judgment was significant because it confirmed the finality of court-recorded settlements.
"The importance of this ruling is that it makes clear that an agreement between the parties at one stage of litigation prevents a challenge before the higher stage," he said.
Divorce case
The case involved a muslim personal status dispute between a husband and wife. The husband asked the court to confirm that he had divorced his wife, saying he had done so by email on June 28, 2025.
The wife filed a counterclaim, arguing she did not receive the email and became aware of the divorce on September 3, 2025. She sought spousal maintenance, compensation, deferred dowry and other financial claims linked to a company the couple had planned to establish, as well as medical insurance costs, travel expenses and temporary monthly maintenance.
During proceedings before the Court of First Instance, both parties appeared in person and agreed to settle the original claim and the counterclaim. The agreement provided for the divorce to be recorded and for the husband to pay the wife Dh125,000 in settlement of all her legal rights arising from the marriage and separation.
The amount covered deferred dowry, waiting-period maintenance, compensation, spousal maintenance, claims related to the company and medical insurance. It was to be paid in instalments until full settlement.
On October 15, 2025, the Court of First Instance confirmed the divorce, recorded the settlement and gave it the force of an executive instrument.
Appeal attempt
The husband appealed, but the Court of Appeal ruled on December 18, 2025, that the appeal was inadmissible. He then challenged that judgment before the Court of Cassation, arguing that he did not understand English — the language in which the settlement had been drafted — that no translator had been present, and that he had been forced to accept the agreement requiring him to pay Dh125,000.
The Court of Cassation rejected the challenge. It said that Article 81 of the Civil Procedure Law allows parties, at any stage of proceedings, to ask the court to record what they have agreed in the hearing minutes, provided the agreement does not breach UAE laws, public order or public morals.
The court said the hearing minutes are an official document unless challenged for forgery, and that the minutes and any agreement attached to them have the force of an executive instrument.
It also said a judge who approves such a settlement is not deciding a dispute between the parties. The judge's role is limited to recording and authenticating the agreement reached before the court, using administrative rather than judicial authority. For that reason, the approval of the agreement is not a judicial judgment and cannot be challenged by appeal or cassation.
The court also rejected the husband's claim that no translator had been present, saying the hearing minutes showed that a legal translator attended and carried out the required translation.
The Court of Cassation dismissed the challenge, ordered the husband to pay legal costs and confiscated the court deposit.
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.
[View Source]