Investment, Banking & Finance

9

Wealth Management

9

Foreign Investment Law

Family & Personal Law

9

Family & Personal Status Law

9

Wealth Management

9

Management & Foreign Citizenship

Real Estate & Property Law

9

Real Estate Legal Services

9

Property Disputes

9

Construction & Infrastructure Law

Government Services

9

Public-Private Partnerships (PPP)

9

Government Contracts (General Terms & Conditions)

9

Public Sector Procurement & Tendering

9

Letter of Award

Healthcare, Pharmaceutical, and Life Sciences

9

Healthcare & Pharmaceutical Law

9

Property Disputes

9

Medical Negligence

Energy, Environment, and Natural Resources Law

9

Energy, Oil & Gas Law

9

Environmental Law & Sustainability

SUBSCRIBE

8

In a recent landmark decision, the Court of Cassation in Dubai has shed light on the complex interplay between sports arbitration and the judicial system in the United Arab Emirates. The case, which involved a dispute between a horse trainer and a stable owner, has far-reaching implications for the sports industry and arbitration practices in the region.

At the heart of the matter was the jurisdiction of the Emirates Centre for Sports Arbitration (ECSA). The dispute originated from a contractual agreement between the parties regarding the training and exploitation of horses for equestrian competitions. When the relationship soured, the trainer sought arbitration through ECSA, resulting in an award that was subsequently challenged in the courts.

The case made its way through the legal system, eventually reaching the Court of Cassation. The court’s ruling emphasized several crucial points that will undoubtedly shape future sports-related disputes in the UAE.

Firstly, the court reaffirmed the principle of compulsory arbitration in sports-related matters. It highlighted that according to Article 38 of the Sports Law, disputes in this domain must be referred to ECSA for arbitration. This mandatory nature of sports arbitration is designed to ensure specialized and efficient resolution of conflicts within the sporting community.

However, the court also grappled with the question of whether there was a valid arbitration agreement between the parties. The absence of a clear, written arbitration clause became a pivotal issue in the case. The court emphasized that for an arbitration agreement to be valid, it must be in writing, as stipulated by Federal Law No. 6 of 2018 on Arbitration.

The judgment delved into the intricacies of what constitutes a valid arbitration agreement. It clarified that such an agreement could be evidenced by written communications between parties, including electronic messages, or by reference to a document containing an arbitration clause. This interpretation aligns with modern commercial practices and recognizes the evolving nature of business communications.

Another significant aspect of the ruling was the court’s stance on the interaction between national courts and arbitration centers. The decision underscored that while sports disputes are primarily within the jurisdiction of ECSA, the courts retain the power to review arbitration awards on specific grounds, such as the validity of the arbitration agreement itself.

The Court of Cassation’s decision also touched upon the principle of competence-competence, which allows arbitral tribunals to rule on their own jurisdiction. However, it clarified that this principle does not preclude courts from examining the validity of arbitration agreements when challenged.

This case serves as a reminder of the importance of clear and unambiguous arbitration clauses in sports-related contracts. It highlights the need for parties involved in the sports industry to be aware of the mandatory arbitration provisions under UAE law and to ensure that their agreements comply with the formal requirements for valid arbitration clauses.

Moreover, the judgment reinforces the UAE’s commitment to supporting alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, particularly in specialized fields like sports. It demonstrates the country’s efforts to balance the autonomy of sports governing bodies with the oversight role of the judiciary.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this ruling by the Dubai Court of Cassation marks a significant development in UAE sports law and arbitration practice. It clarifies the boundaries between sports arbitration and judicial intervention, providing valuable guidance for athletes, sports organizations, and legal practitioners. As the UAE continues to position itself as a hub for international sports events, this decision will undoubtedly play a crucial role in shaping the legal landscape for sports-related disputes in the country.

Having said that, Contact Khairallah Advocates & Legal Consultants and benefit from our free 30-min legal consultation.

*Disclaimer: our blogs, law updates and FAQ’s are freely distributed for educational purposes and to showcase recent updates and regulations in the UAE’s framework.

If you have any questions and need assistance, contact us at our number or book an appointment online.

Arbitration