A23 v B23 & Ors [2026] ADGMCFI 0002 (13 January 2026)

A23 v B23 & Ors [2026] ADGMCFI 0002 (13 January 2026)

The Termination Order was not an 'award' for the purposes of section 58 of the ADGM Arbitration Regulations 2015 and thus not susceptible to being set aside. The arbitral procedure did not breach the fair treatment rule or the parties' agreement. The Costs Award was valid and enforceable, and A23 was barred from resisting its enforcement, having failed to apply to set it aside within the statutory period.

Citation
[2026] ADGMCFI 0002
Parties
Claimant: A23; Defendant: B23; Defendant: C23; Defendant: D23; Defendant: E23; Claimant: A25; Defendant: B25
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
13 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Commercial Arbitration Related Applications / Judgment on Set Aside and Recognition/enforcement Applications
Outcome
Set Aside Application dismissed; Recognition Application granted; Stay Application and Dismissal Application dismissed as otiose.
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Arbitral Awards, Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Arbitrator Impartiality and Disclosure, Procedural Fairness, Delay and Termination of Proceedings
Arbitration Commercial Law Civil Procedure Setting Aside Arbitral Awards Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Arbitrator Impartiality and Disclosure Procedural Fairness Delay and Termination of Proceedings

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A23

Claimant

B23

Defendant

C23

Defendant

D23

Defendant

E23

Defendant

A25

Claimant

B25

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Arbitration Related Applications / Judgment on Set Aside and Recognition/enforcement Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Termination Order is an 'award' susceptible to setting aside under section 58 of the ADGM Arbitration Regulations 2015
  2. 2 Whether the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties or the law
  3. 3 Whether the Costs Award should be recognised and enforced

Ratio Decidendi

The Termination Order was not an 'award' for the purposes of section 58 of the ADGM Arbitration Regulations 2015 and thus not susceptible to being set aside. The arbitral procedure did not breach the fair treatment rule or the parties' agreement. The Costs Award was valid and enforceable, and A23 was barred from resisting its enforcement, having failed to apply to set it aside within the statutory period.

Court Disposition

Set Aside Application dismissed; Recognition Application granted; Stay Application and Dismissal Application dismissed as otiose.

Orders

  • The application to set aside the Termination Order is dismissed.
  • The application for recognition and enforcement of the Costs Award is granted.