Equipoise
Project Management
& Consultancy

Insights from Equipoise

Counterpoise

UAE court and arbitration decisions, monthly from Equipoise.

Written by Ella Rowles-Davies. Published on the 25th of each month. Free.

What it covers

Each issue takes the month’s decisions of the DIFC Courts and the ADGM Courts and picks out those that move money. That includes the courts’ decisions recognising, enforcing or setting aside awards made under the DIAC and arbitrateAD rules, together with announcements from the two arbitration centres. Enforcement, freezing orders, insolvency, digital-asset disputes and the funding of litigation all come within it.

The facts come from the courts’ own published decisions, and every quotation is checked against the judgment it comes from. Some items add our reading of why a decision matters to anyone with money at stake in a UAE dispute.

Subscribe

Issues

Issue 2  ·  23 October 2026

What it costs to attack an award

Three DIFC assessments in three days on the costs of fighting about an arbitral award, from USD 25,000 to an interim certificate of USD 1,380,508.12, a DIAC award set aside with indemnity costs refused over a rolled-up bill, the Court of Appeal on enforcing a settlement inside the action it settled and on security for costs against appellants said to be in contempt, a judgment debtor refused time to pay, a conditional fee arrangement upheld, an employment award cut on appeal because a fixed term needed no notice, a developer refused default judgment because its termination sum may be a penalty, and an ADGM settlement waiver void for want of one warranty.

Issue 1  ·  25 September 2026

Who funds the defendant’s lawyers

Two DIFC orders on who funds a frozen defendant’s lawyers, a DIAC-rules award set aside for unargued issues, security for costs on an award challenge, a reinsurance broker held to have breached its duty by failing to place back-to-back cover, a DIFC Will upheld against three challenges, two Court of Appeal decisions and two ADGM judgments.

Counterpoise reports and comments on public court decisions and publications. It is not legal advice and should not be relied on as such. Anyone whose position may be affected by a decision reported here should take advice from a qualified practitioner in the relevant jurisdiction.