A17 v B17 & Ors; A18 v B18 & Ors [2026] ADGMCFI 0008 (23 March 2026)

A17 v B17 & Ors; A18 v B18 & Ors [2026] ADGMCFI 0008 (23 March 2026)

The applications to stay or set aside enforcement were refused because the alleged new evidence (Dr B's affidavit) was not new or material, and the Respondents had previously raised the same allegations in the arbitration and related proceedings. No realistic prospect existed for a successful challenge in the English High Court or under UAE public policy. The permission to use asset information for enforcement was upheld as consistent with established legal principles. The final third party debt order was granted as the debt from D17 to C17 was sufficiently established and undisputed in substance.

Citation
[2026] ADGMCFI 0008
Parties
Claimant/applicant: A17; First Defendant/first Respondent: B17; Second Defendant/second Respondent: C17; Third Defendant/third Respondent: D17; Claimant/applicant: A18; First Defendant/first Respondent: B18; Second Defendant/second Respondent: C18; Third Party: D18
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
23 March 2026
Procedural Posture
Commercial and Civil / Judgment After Multiple Post Award Enforcement and Set Aside Applications
Outcome
Applications to stay and set aside enforcement dismissed; permission to use information for enforcement upheld; final third party debt order granted.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Freezing Orders, Third Party Debt Orders, Public Policy Exception, Confidentiality of Information, Stay of Proceedings
Arbitration Civil Procedure Commercial Law Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Freezing Orders Third Party Debt Orders Public Policy Exception Confidentiality of Information +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A17

Claimant/applicant

B17

First Defendant/first Respondent

C17

Second Defendant/second Respondent

D17

Third Defendant/third Respondent

A18

Claimant/applicant

B18

First Defendant/first Respondent

C18

Second Defendant/second Respondent

D18

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Commercial and Civil / Judgment After Multiple Post Award Enforcement and Set Aside Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to stay enforcement proceedings pending a prospective challenge to the arbitral award in the English High Court
  2. 2 Whether to set aside the recognition and enforcement order based on alleged new evidence and public policy grounds
  3. 3 Whether to set aside the permission order allowing use of asset information for enforcement

Ratio Decidendi

The applications to stay or set aside enforcement were refused because the alleged new evidence (Dr B's affidavit) was not new or material, and the Respondents had previously raised the same allegations in the arbitration and related proceedings. No realistic prospect existed for a successful challenge in the English High Court or under UAE public policy. The permission to use asset information for enforcement was upheld as consistent with established legal principles. The final third party debt order was granted as the debt from D17 to C17 was sufficiently established and undisputed in substance.

Court Disposition

Applications to stay and set aside enforcement dismissed; permission to use information for enforcement upheld; final third party debt order granted.

Orders

  • Permission Application dismissed.
  • R & E Applications dismissed.