ArbitrateAD Rules Match Pace Set in Regional Centres

February 29, 2024

Reading Time : 10+ min

By: Ryan Whelan, Freddie Akiki, Emily Kemp, Alyazya AlQubaisi

The Abu Dhabi International Arbitration Centre (ArbitrateAD) replaced the Abu Dhabi Commercial Conciliation and Arbitration Centre (ADCCAC) effective 1 February 2024. ArbitrateAD’s aim is to be “the world’s leading catalyst for efficient international dispute settlement”. The ArbitrateAD Arbitration Rules 2024 (the ArbitrateAD Rules) certainly position ArbitrateAD to challenge other centres regionally and globally. The ArbitrateAD Rules incorporate international best practice throughout. Particularly noteworthy is the selection of the Abu Dhabi Global Market (the ADGM) as the default seat of arbitration; the default applicability of the expedited procedure to disputes with a value up to AED 9 million (c. USD 2.4 million) and the provisions enabling summary dismissal.

Given that many in the region will be evaluating ArbitrateAD against the arbitration rules of the ADGM Arbitration Centre, the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and/or the Saudi Centre for Commercial Arbitration (SCCA), we in this briefing summarise and contextualise the ArbitrateAD Rules against those of the ADGM, DIAC and the SCCA. Additionally, we provide two easy reference tables which compare the ArbitrateAD Rules against those of (i) the global “top 5” arbitration rules by case volume, i.e., the International Court of Arbitration (ICC), London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC), Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) and China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) rules; and (ii) the Middle East’s most prominent arbitration rules, i.e., the ADGM, Bahrain Chamber for Dispute Resolution (BCDR), DIAC and Qatar International Centre for Conciliation and Arbitration (QICCA) rules. The two tables can be joined to allow comparison of any combination of rules.

Court of Arbitration

In January 2024, ArbitrateAD announced the appointment of its inaugural Court of Arbitration (the Court). The Court comprises 15 practitioners based in 11 jurisdictions and has supervisory authority over the Centre’s arbitration and dispute resolution services.1  The Court’s powers include the appointment and replacement of arbitrators, the resolution of challenges to arbitrators or arbitration agreements, the disposition of requests for joinder or consolidation, and the scrutiny of awards.2

Nine-Month Time Frame for Issuing Awards

The rules of the Middle East’s major arbitral institutions now generally impose short time frames for issuing final awards, all of which may be extended upon the parties’ agreement. The ArbitrateAD Rules as a default position require Tribunals to make an award on the merits within nine months of the initial case management conference (CMC).3  The default nine-month time frame is longer than the six-month deadline under the old ADCCAC rules, which is the present position under the DIAC rules, but it remains a relatively short time frame when compared against those set by some of the international “Top 5” centres. For example, the LCIA rules impose a time frame of three months following the last submission from the parties, the HKIAC rules specify a time frame of three months from the close of the proceedings and the SIAC rules provide that a draft award is to be submitted within 45 days from the close of proceedings. Comparing the regional centres:

 

ArbitrateAD Rules (2024) ADGM Arbitration Regulations (2015) ADCCAC Procedural Regulations of Arbitration (2013) DIAC Rules (2022) SCCA Rules (2023)
Award to be issued within nine months from the date of the initial CMC. Time frame may be extended upon the joint request of the parties. Not specified. Within six months from the date on which the file was received by the sole arbitrator or president of the Tribunal. The Tribunal may extend this time frame by up to a maximum of three months on its own motion or upon a party’s request.The ADCCAC Committee may extend the time limit further following a reasoned application by the Tribunal or a party. Six months from the date of the file’s transmission to the Tribunal by DIAC (unless this conflicts with a mandatory provision of the procedural law of the seat). Time frame may be extended at any time by written agreement of the parties, or by the DIAC Arbitration Court.4 Unless the parties agree otherwise or SCCA extends the time frame, the award shall be made no later than 75 days from the closing of the proceedings.5

New Expedited Procedure Available

The expedited procedure stipulates that an award shall be issued within four months from the date the case file is submitted to the Tribunal. The ArbitrateAD Rules stipulate that the expedited procedure applies by default if the amount in dispute, i.e., the aggregate of all claims and counterclaims, does not exceed AED 9 million (c. USD 2.4 million).6  The Tribunal can (i) apply the expedited procedure for disputes above this value or (ii) disapply the procedure where it would apply by default if the parties agree or the Tribunal directs after affording the parties an opportunity to be heard.7

The introduction of an expedited procedure in the ArbitrateAD Rules reflects international best practice and brings the ArbitrateAD Rules in line with the rules of the SCCA and DIAC, both of which, like the ArbitrateAD Rules, afford parties the option of agreeing to apply expedited procedure rules irrespective of whether the stipulated maximum dispute value has been exceeded. Notably, the default ceiling under the ArbitrateAD Rules is slightly below that of the ICC (c. USD 3 million), but nine times greater than the DIAC ceiling (AED 1 million) and more than double the SCCA ceiling (SAR 4 million, c. AED 3.9 million):

 

ArbitrateAD Rules (2024)

ADGM Arbitration Regulations (2015)

ADCCAC Procedural Regulations of Arbitration (2013)

DIAC Rules (2022)

SCCA Rules (2023)

Unless the parties have expressly agreed otherwise, expedited procedure rules apply if the amount in dispute does not exceed AED 9 million, representing the aggregate value of all claims and counterclaims.

Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the Tribunal may, on the application of a party or on its own volition, after affording the parties a reasonable opportunity to be heard, request the Court either to apply or not to apply the expedited procedure, regardless of whether the AED 9 million criteria above has been satisfied.8

No express provision for an expedited procedure. However, under Article 34, the Tribunal must, in all cases, adopt procedures that avoid unnecessary delay and expense, and facilitate efficient and expeditious conduct of the arbitration.

Not available.

Expedited procedure is available:

(i) if the aggregate amount in dispute does not exceed AED 1 million (excluding interest and costs of representation) or such other sum determined by the DIAC Board; (ii) if the parties agree in writing; or (iii) in cases of exceptional urgency as determined by the DIAC Arbitration Court upon a party’s application.9

Expedited procedure rules apply provided: (i) the amount in dispute (the aggregate amount of claims) does not exceed SAR 4 million (excluding costs of arbitration); or (ii) the parties so agree.10

Default Seat

Mirroring the DIAC rules’ default stipulation in favour of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC), the default seat of arbitration under the ArbitrateAD Rules is the ADGM.11  By way of background for readers unfamiliar with the landscape: the ADGM and the DIFC are financial free zones with independent jurisdictions exempted from the United Arab Emirates’ civil and commercial laws. The free zones’ legal and regulatory frameworks are based on international standards and principles of English common law. In broad terms, the point of distinction between the financial centres is that the ADGM has chosen to reflect English common law on an “evergreen basis” by giving English caselaw direct precedential status,12  whilst in the DIFC - as was made clear in the recent DIFC Court’s decision in Industrial Group - English law principles cannot be imported to “fill” any gaps in DIFC statutes.13 

Early Determination of Cases

Article 45 of the ArbitrateAD Rules allows for the early (or summary) dismissal of claims or defences that are manifestly without legal merit or manifestly inadmissible or outside of the tribunal’s jurisdiction.14  Any application for early dismissal shall be granted or denied within 30 days of its filing unless the Tribunal deems it necessary to extend the deadline by a maximum of 15 days. This effectively mirrors the SCCA position. The ADGM regulations likewise make provision for summary dismissal, albeit without a time limit on determination. The DIAC rules are silent on summary dismissal; however, the authors are aware of instances where summary dismissal applications have been considered and granted. For context:

 

ArbitrateAD Rules (2024)

ADGM Arbitration Regulations (2015)

ADCCAC Procedural Regulations of Arbitration (2013)

DIAC Rules (2022)

SCCA Rules (2023)

Any party may apply for early (or summary) dismissal of claims or defences that are (i) manifestly without legal merit, or (ii) manifestly inadmissible or outside of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. The application shall be granted or denied within 30 days of its filing.

Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, a party may apply to the Tribunal in writing at any time for summary dismissal on the basis that any other party has no real prospect of success in respect of part or the whole of the claim, counterclaim or defence.15

No summary dismissal provisions specified.

No summary dismissal provisions expressly specified. However, the Tribunal shall ensure that the arbitration is conducted expeditiously, diligently and in a cost-efficient manner.16

Any party may apply to the Tribunal to dispose of issues of jurisdiction, admissibility or legal merit raised in a claim or defence without the need to follow every step that would otherwise be taken in the ordinary course of an arbitration. The Tribunal shall issue an order or award on the application within 30 days from the date it allows the application to proceed.17


In addition, emergency arbitrators can be appointed pursuant to Article 35 of the ArbitrateAD Rules. Once appointed, the emergency arbitrator shall have the same powers as vested in the Tribunal, including authority to decide any issues as to their own jurisdiction and to order any interim measures they deem appropriate.18  Often, especially in the region, parties are seeking interim measures as a matter of urgency; the ArbitrateAD Rules’ provision of quick routes for at-risk parties to better secure and enforce their rights will be welcomed. Comparing the regional rules:

 

ArbitrateAD Rules (2024)

ADGM Arbitration Regulations (2015)

ADCCAC Procedural Regulations of Arbitration (2013)

DIAC Rules (2022)

SCCA Rules (2023)

A party may seek urgent preliminary measures prior to the constitution of the Tribunal by filing an application to appoint an emergency arbitrator.

The Court shall appoint an emergency arbitrator within one day of receipt of the application and proof of payment of the fee.

The existence of an arbitration agreement shall not preclude a party from applying to the ADGM Court of First Instance, before or during arbitral proceedings, for interim measures. The ADGM Court of First Instance has the same powers of issuing interim measures in relation to arbitral proceedings as it would in relation to court proceedings.19

Disputes prior to the constitution of the Tribunal which are not provided for by the Rules shall be ruled upon by the ADCCAC Committee. Such ruling shall not be subject to challenge as long as the Tribunal has not been formed.20

A party may apply for emergency interim relief prior to the Tribunal’s constitution.

If the application is allowed, DIAC shall seek to appoint an emergency arbitrator within one day of receipt of the application.21

A party may apply for emergency relief prior to the appointment of the Tribunal by submitting a written application to SCCA and all other parties by email, along with the appropriate administrative fee and emergency arbitrator fee. SCCA shall appoint the emergency arbitrator within one business day of receipt of the notice.22

Joinder and Consolidation

A request to join an additional party to an arbitration can be submitted to the Case Management Office and must be made no later than the time the Answer is filed.23  No party may be joined unless all parties agree (including the additional party), or the Tribunal determines that the additional party is subject to the jurisdiction of the centre.24 The comparative position on joinder:

 

ArbitrateAD Rules (2024)

ADGM Arbitration Regulations (2015)

ADCCAC Procedural Regulations of Arbitration (2013)

DIAC Rules (2022)

SCCA Rules (2023)

The Court may, in its discretion, admit an additional party to join the arbitration, if: (i) the existing and additional parties all agree; or (ii) the Court is satisfied that the additional party is prima facie subject to the Centre’s jurisdiction. The Court shall afford the parties a reasonable opportunity to be heard and shall have regard to: (i) the above requirements; (ii) the efficiency and expeditiousness of the proceedings; and (iii) any other relevant circumstances.

Parties are free to agree that the arbitral proceedings shall be consolidated with other arbitral proceedings. Unless the parties agree to confer such power on the Tribunal, the Tribunal has no power to order consolidation of proceedings.

No joinder provisions expressly specified.

Prior to the appointment of an arbitrator, the Court may, in its discretion, admit an additional party to join the arbitration, if: (i) all parties (including any party to be joined) have consented in writing to the joinder; and (ii) the Court is prima facie satisfied that any such party to be joined may be a party to the agreement to arbitrate referred to in the Request.

A party may also be joined following the constitution of the Tribunal. The Tribunal may, upon a party’s application and having considered any other relevant factors, allow one or more additional parties to be joined, if conditions (i) and (ii) above are satisfied.25

A party may request that the Court join one or more additional parties to the arbitration.

The Tribunal must also determine whether the joinder is appropriate by considering all relevant circumstances of the case, which shall include: (i) the Tribunal’s jurisdiction over the additional party; (ii) the timing of the joinder request; (iii) potential conflict of interest; and (iv) the impact of the joinder on the arbitration.


In terms of consolidation, the ArbitrateAD Rules sensibly allow for claims arising from more than one contract to be brought in a single arbitration, which was not the case in the previous ADCCAC Rules.26  If the responding party objects, the Court in determining whether to allow the multi-contract arbitration shall consider if the various arbitration agreements are compatible, the nature of the relief sought, and the likely efficiency and expeditiousness of the proceedings. The comparative position on consolidation:

 

ArbitrateAD Rules (2024)

ADGM Arbitration Regulations (2015)

ADCCAC Procedural Regulations of Arbitration (2013)

DIAC Rules (2022)

SCCA Rules (2023)

A party may request the Court to consolidate two or more arbitrations pending under the Rules into a single arbitration, provided that: (i) all parties have agreed to consolidate; (ii) all Claims asserted in the arbitrations are made under the same Arbitration Agreement; or (iii) where the Claims are made under more than one Arbitration Agreement, the relief sought arises out of the same transaction or series of transactions, including where the Disputes arise out of contracts consisting of a principal contract and its ancillary contract(s), and the Arbitration Agreements are compatible. In deciding whether to consolidate, the Tribunal shall have regard to: (i) the above requirements; (ii) the stage of the pending arbitration(s); (iii) the efficiency and expeditiousness of the proceedings; and (iv) any other relevant circumstances.

Parties are free to agree that the arbitral proceedings shall be consolidated with other arbitral proceedings. Unless the parties agree to confer such power on the Tribunal, the Tribunal has no power to order consolidation of proceedings.

The parties are free to agree on the procedure for joining an additional party to an arbitration, provided always that the party to be joined is party to the arbitration agreement or has consented to joinder.

No joinder and consolidation provisions expressly specified.

Prior to the appointment of an arbitrator, the Arbitration Court may, upon an application by a party to proceedings, allow two or more arbitrations to be consolidated into a single arbitration if certain conditions are met if: (i) all claims in the arbitrations are made under the same arbitration agreement; or (ii) the arbitrations involve the same parties and the disputes arise out of the same legal relationship(s); or the underlying contracts consist of a principal contract and its ancillary contract(s); or the claims arise out of the same transaction or series of related transactions.

A party may request the Court to consolidate two or more arbitrations pending under the Rules into a single arbitration, provided that: (i) all parties have agreed to consolidate; (ii) all claims asserted in the arbitrations are made under the same arbitration agreement(s); (iii) where the claims are made under different arbitration agreement(s), but the disputes in the arbitration arise in connection with the same legal relationship, and the Court finds the arbitration agreement(s) to be compatible; or (iv) all members of all Arbitral Tribunals are identical and request that there be consolidation.

The Court shall have regard to all relevant circumstances, including: (i) applicable law; (ii) the extent to which the same arbitrators have been appointed; (iii) progress already made in the arbitrations; (iv) any common issues of law and/or facts; and (v) whether consolidate would serve the interests of justice and efficiency.27

Harnessing Technology

Initiatives such as the campaign for greener arbitrations have inspired many centres, including the SCCA and DIAC, to introduce provisions encouraging electronic communications and remote hearings. The ArbitrateAD Rules give the Tribunal discretion as to the mode of hearings, for instance the technology adopted,28  but the ArbitrateAD Rules do not—unlike the SCCA rules—include environmental impact as a consideration for the Tribunal or parties to consider in respect of the conduct of the arbitration. Some commentators may regard this as a missed opportunity; however, the ArbitrateAD Rules grant Tribunals the “broadest of powers” in the conduct of proceedings, and there is consequently sufficient latitude for the adoption of new technology and for environmental factors to be considered. The comparative position:

 

ArbitrateAD Rules (2024)

ADGM Arbitration Regulations (2015)

ADCCAC Procedural Regulations of Arbitration (2013)

DIAC Rules (2022)

SCCA Rules (2023)

The Tribunal shall, prior to hearings, take steps to organise the mode of hearings, including in relation to the use of technology.

Awards may be signed electronically by the Tribunal, if deemed appropriate, taking into account all relevant circumstances, including but not limited to applicable law.

The Tribunal shall consider the use of technology in order to enhance the efficient and expeditious conduct of the arbitration, including the use of any other technology in the efficient and expeditious conduct of the arbitration.

The Tribunal may sign the award by electronic means.29

Not specified.

The Tribunal shall determine whether hearings shall be held in person, by telephone or through any other appropriate means of virtual communication, including video conferencing.

Subject to any mandatory provisions of the procedural law applicable to the seat of the arbitration and after consultation with the parties, the Tribunal may sign the award by electronic means.30

In establishing the procedures for the arbitration, the Tribunal and the parties are encouraged to consider how technology, including but not limited to electronic communications, e‑filings and the electronic presentation of evidence, could be used, including to reduce the environmental impact of the arbitration.

Unless the parties agree, or applicable law requires otherwise, all awards may be signed electronically.31

New Disclosure Requirements for Third-Party Funding

Reflecting the increasing use of third-party funding in the region, the ArbitrateAD Rules feature similar requirements to those of the ADGM, SCCA and DIAC rules: Parties must promptly disclose any third-party funding arrangements, and if an arrangement is in place prior to the initiation of proceedings, then a claimant must disclose this in the Request for Arbitration.32

Robust Confidentiality Provisions

The ArbitrateAD Rules introduce a comprehensive confidentiality regime which aligns with international standards.33  Whilst retaining the pre-existing obligation on parties to maintain the confidentiality of awards, the ArbitrateAD Rules expressly give the tribunal power to enforce confidentiality obligations, take measures to protect confidentiality and trade secrets, and to issue an order or award for sanctions or damages in relation to wrongful disclosures.34

Court Review of Awards & Waiver of Right to Appeal

Consistent with DIAC and the SCCA, ArbitrateAD’s Court will undertake the procedural review of awards. The ArbitrateAD Rules require Tribunals to consult the Centre’s Award Checklist when issuing an award.35  The checklist is designed to assist arbitrators in their drafting and ensure the enforceability of awards rendered. The checklist will be published and amended periodically by the Centre. In scrutinising awards, the Court may suggest non-substantive modifications to the Tribunal, including drawing the Tribunal’s attention to any required changes to the form of the award, apparent clerical errors, inconsistencies or omissions in the Award, or to matters addressed in the Award Checklist.36  The role of the Court in this respect is consistent with DIAC and the SCCA but more limited than that of the ICC Court, which has the power and regularly does comment and draw the attention of Tribunals to points of substance.37

The ArbitrateAD Rules state that the parties are deemed to have waived all rights to appeal an award, including before any state court.38  The only exemptions expressly provided for under the ArbitrateAD Rules are where a correction or interpretation of an award is required,39  or where the award has failed to adjudicate on claims asserted during the arbitration.40  Comparatively: the DIAC rules are silent on appeal, while the SCCA rules are aligned with the ArbitrateAD position.41

Transitional Position

The ArbitrateAD Rules will apply to arbitrations commenced on or after 1 February 2024 where the parties have agreed to submit their disputes to arbitration under the ADCCAC rules. Cases still pending at the ADCCAC will continue to be administered in accordance with the 2013 ADCCAC Rules.

If you would like to discuss and/or receive training on the ArbitrateAD and/or any other arbitral rules, please contact Senior Counsel Ryan Whelan on rwhelan@akingump.com.

A special thank you to Alyazya AlQubaisi for her contributions to this alert.


1 Article 3(2).

2 Article 3(3).

3 Article 38(1).

4 Article 35 of the DIAC Rules.

5 Article 33 of the SCCA Rules.

6 Article 36(1).

7 Article 36(3) and 36(4).

8 Article 36.

9 Article 32 of the DIAC Rules.

10 Appendix II of the SCCA Rules.

11 Article 22.

12 English Law in ADGM – Guidance Notes, para 2.3.

13 The Industrial Group Limited v Abdelazim EL Shikh EL Fadil Hamid [2022] DIFC CA 005 and CA 006.

14 Article 45(1).

15 Article 42 of the ADGM Arbitration Regulations.

16 Article 17.2 of the DIAC Rules.

17 Article 26 of the SCCA Rules.

18 Article 35(10) and (12).

19 Articles 28 and 31 of the ADGM Arbitration Regulations.

20 Articles 25 and 34 of the ADCCAC Regulations.

21 Appendix 11 – Article 2 of the DIAC Rules.

22 Article 7 of the SCCA Rules.

23 Article 11(2).

24 Article 11(4).

25 Articles 8 and 9 of the DIAC Rules.

26 Article 10.

27 Articles 12 and 13 of the SCCA Rules.

28 Article 33(2).

29 Articles 34 & 55.

30 Articles 26 & 34.

31 Articles 25 & 36.

32 Article 48.

33 Article 47.

34 Article 47(4).

35 Article 41(7).

36 Article 40(2).

37 Article 34 of the ICC Rules.

38 Article 41(12).

39 Article 42. The right of a party to request the Tribunal to correct or interpret the award is provided for under the rules of each of the Middle East’s most prominent arbitration centres as well as the “top 5” arbitration centres.

40 Article 43. A party may request the Tribunal to issue an additional award on this basis under the SCCA rules (Article 39), the DIAC rules (Article 37), the BCDR rules (Article 37) and the QICCA rules (Article 40) as well as under the rules of each of the “top 5” arbitration centres.

41 Article 3(2) of the SCCA Rules.

Share This Insight

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.