Family, Wills, Succession Planning

A 41-year-old Asian man has been sentenced to six months in prison and fined Dh5,000 after an Ajman court found him guilty of assaulting a woman and causing injuries that temporarily prevented her from carrying out her normal personal activities.

The Ajman Federal Court of First Instance, Third Misdemeanour Circuit, also ordered the defendant to pay court fees and referred the woman’s claim for compensation to the competent Civil Court.

Woman Reports Assault To Police

The case originated on January 30, 2026, when the woman reported to Ajman Police that the defendant had physically assaulted her.

A subsequent medical examination documented injuries sustained in the incident and found that they had resulted in temporary incapacity lasting less than 20 days.

The Public Prosecution charged the man with intentionally assaulting the woman and causing injuries that prevented her from carrying out her normal personal activities during that period.

Court Examines Evidence

According to the case records, the defendant initially admitted to the assault during police questioning but subsequently denied the charge during the Public Prosecution investigation. He maintained his denial when appearing before the court through a remote video hearing.

The court examined the woman’s statements, witness testimony, police and prosecution records, and the medical report documenting her injuries.

After assessing the evidence, the court found the defendant guilty. It took into account the consistency of the woman’s account, the medical findings and the defendant’s initial statement to police before he later denied the allegation.

Compensation Claim Sent To Civil Court

The woman’s legal representatives filed a civil claim seeking provisional compensation for the physical, material and moral harm allegedly caused by the assault.

The criminal proceedings did not determine the full extent or monetary value of the damages claimed. The court held that these matters required a separate civil assessment and referred the compensation claim to the competent Civil Court under Article 26 of the Criminal Procedure Law.

The Civil Court will schedule a hearing and notify the parties before examining the claim.

The criminal judgment imposes a six-month prison term, a Dh5,000 fine and court fees. Any compensation awarded for the alleged physical, material or moral damages will be determined separately through the civil proceedings.

A woman who suffered fractured upper front teeth, a deep cut to her tongue and bruising to her right shoulder after being assaulted by her husband has been awarded Dh50,000 in compensation by the Al Dhafra Court of First Instance.

The court held that a final criminal judgment against the husband was binding on the civil proceedings in establishing that the assault had occurred and that he was responsible for it.

It found that the requirements for civil liability, including wrongful conduct, damage and a causal link between the two, had been satisfied.

The woman had filed a lawsuit against her husband, an African national, seeking Dh100,000 for material, physical, psychological and cosmetic harm resulting from the assault. She also requested annual late-payment interest of 5 per cent, court costs and lawyers’ fees.

According to the case records, the husband entered her room following an argument and struck her in the face and body. The assault resulted in injuries documented in a medical report.

He had previously been convicted in the criminal proceedings of assault causing bodily harm and sentenced to two months in prison, with the sentence suspended, and fined Dh10,000. The civil compensation claim was subsequently referred to the competent court.

The husband contested the claim, asking the court to dismiss it on the grounds that his wife had not sufficiently established the extent or value of the alleged damage. He also argued that she had failed to provide adequate evidence of the material and future losses underlying her Dh100,000 demand.

In its judgment, the civil court said the unlawful act considered in the criminal case was the same conduct on which the compensation claim was based. As the criminal judgment had become final, it conclusively established the occurrence of the assault, its legal character and the husband’s responsibility.

The medical report confirmed that the woman had sustained a deep cut to her tongue, fractures to her upper front teeth and bruising to her right shoulder. The court found that these injuries amounted to compensable harm directly attributable to the assault.

It also recognised the psychological and emotional suffering caused by the incident, holding the husband liable for that harm as well.

The court ordered him to pay Dh50,000 in compensation for material and moral damages, together with annual interest of 4 per cent until the amount is paid in full. He was also directed to bear the court costs and pay Dh200 towards lawyers’ fees.

A woman who called off her planned marriage has been ordered by an Abu Dhabi court to pay Dh60,000 to her former suitor after failing to return cash and gold bars he had given her before the wedding.

The Abu Dhabi Family, Civil and Administrative Claims Court issued the ruling after finding that the woman had acknowledged the debt in writing and subsequently agreed to settle the dispute for Dh60,000, but failed to make the agreed payment.

According to court records, the man had given the woman cash and gold after they agreed to marry. He said the items had a combined value of Dh67,827.

When the woman later decided not to proceed with the marriage, the man asked her to return the money and gold. She acknowledged that she owed him the amounts and items but did not repay him, prompting him to file a lawsuit.

In his claim, the man sought the return of all the cash and gold he had given her. He also sought Dh31,500, representing the stated value of the gold, if the bars could not be returned.

He supported his claim with bank-transfer records and a written acknowledgement signed by both parties.

Settlement

During the proceedings, the former couple informed the court that they had reached an agreement under which the woman would pay Dh60,000 in two instalments. They initially asked the court to formally record the agreement as an enforceable settlement.

However, when the case returned to court for confirmation, only the man appeared. He told the court that the woman had declined to attend and sign the final settlement agreement.

The court found that the woman's earlier written acknowledgement established that she owed Dh17,300 in cash and two one-ounce gold bars.

It held that the signed acknowledgement was legally binding and could not be disregarded unilaterally without a valid legal basis. The woman appeared before the court but did not dispute the authenticity or contents of the document. Instead, she proposed settling the entire dispute by paying Dh60,000, an offer that the man accepted.

As there was no evidence that she had paid the agreed amount, the court concluded that the debt remained outstanding. The court therefore ordered the woman to pay Dh60,000 to the man, in addition to court fees and legal expenses.

Family disputes increasingly cross borders, and financial obligations arising from them often follow the same path. A spouse who secures a maintenance or alimony order in London, Mumbai or Paris may find that the former partner has moved to Dubai or Abu Dhabi, bringing the question of how the foreign order can be enforced in the UAE into sharp focus. The same issue arises where a person moves to the Emirates after an overseas court has imposed continuing financial obligations.

The answer is that a foreign maintenance or alimony order may be enforceable in the UAE, but recognition is not automatic. The UAE has a statutory framework for enforcing foreign judgments and orders, alongside treaty arrangements that may apply depending on the country where the order was issued. Family maintenance orders can also present issues that do not arise in an ordinary commercial debt claim, particularly where payments are periodic, the amount can be varied, or the order includes obligations extending into the future.

The practical outcome therefore depends not only on the existence of a foreign order, but also on the issuing court's jurisdiction, the finality of the order, service on the parties, the applicable treaty framework and whether enforcement would conflict with UAE public policy.

The Statutory Basis

The principal domestic framework is Federal Decree-Law No. 42 of 2022, which introduced the current UAE Civil Procedure Code. Articles 222 to 225 deal specifically with the enforcement of foreign judgments, orders and certain other instruments. Article 222 allows a foreign judgment or order to be enforced in the UAE subject to conditions linked to the law of the country in which it was issued, while setting out a series of requirements that the UAE Execution Judge must examine.

The first question is jurisdiction. The UAE courts must not have had exclusive jurisdiction over the underlying dispute, while the foreign court must have had jurisdiction under the rules applicable in the country where the judgment was made. The foreign judgment must also have been issued by a competent court and duly authenticated or endorsed in accordance with the law of that jurisdiction.

Due process is another central requirement. The parties must have been properly summoned and represented in the foreign proceedings. This can become particularly important where a maintenance order was made in the absence of the person against whom enforcement is later sought. Evidence of service and participation may therefore become an important part of the enforcement file.

The order must also have acquired the force of res judicata under the law of the issuing country. In practical terms, the creditor should be able to establish that the judgment is final and enforceable in its country of origin. The UAE court does not ordinarily reopen the underlying family dispute and reconsider its merits; the focus at the enforcement stage is whether the statutory conditions for recognition have been satisfied.

There are further safeguards. A foreign order cannot be enforced if it conflicts with a judgment or order already issued by a UAE court or if its contents are contrary to public order or morals in the UAE. Article 225 also makes clear that the domestic provisions operate without prejudice to international conventions and agreements to which the UAE is a party.

The procedure itself is more streamlined than the traditional route of bringing a fresh substantive action. An application is submitted by petition to the Execution Judge, who under Article 222 is required to issue an order within five working days of submission. The order is subject to direct appeal. In practice, however, the statutory timetable should not be confused with the time required to prepare documents, satisfy authentication requirements or resolve any challenge to enforcement.

Foreign judgments and supporting documents must also satisfy the applicable documentary and language requirements. As UAE court proceedings are conducted in Arabic, foreign-language judgments generally need an appropriate Arabic legal translation, while documents issued abroad may require authentication and legalisation before they can be relied upon in the UAE.

Treaties And The Reciprocity Question

The statutory route is not the only possible avenue. Treaty arrangements can materially alter the enforcement analysis, particularly where the issuing state and the UAE are parties to a judicial cooperation convention.

The Riyadh Arab Agreement for Judicial Cooperation provides a framework for recognition and enforcement among participating Arab states and covers, among other matters, judgments involving personal status. The GCC Convention on the Execution of Judgments, Delegations and Judicial Notifications likewise provides a regional mechanism for enforcing civil, commercial and personal-status judgments between GCC states. Both conventions contain their own conditions and grounds for refusal, so the terms of the relevant instrument must be examined rather than assuming that a foreign family order will automatically qualify.

The UAE-India relationship requires a more careful distinction. India and the UAE signed an agreement in 1999 covering juridical and judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters, including the execution of judgments and arbitral awards. India subsequently notified the UAE as a reciprocating territory in 2020 for the purposes of Section 44A of the Indian Code of Civil Procedure, specifying the UAE courts whose decrees could be directly executed in India.

That development is significant for cross-border enforcement involving the two countries, but the Indian notification should not be treated as a universal rule that automatically determines how every Indian family order will be enforced in the UAE. The nature of the order, the relevant treaty provisions and the requirements of UAE law still have to be considered.

The position with the United Kingdom is similarly nuanced. The UAE and UK entered into a treaty on judicial assistance in civil and commercial matters in 2006, which entered into force in 2008. However, that agreement concerns areas such as service of judicial documents and the taking of evidence and does not establish a reciprocal regime for recognition and enforcement of civil judgments. English and Welsh judgments therefore continue to be considered in the UAE under the applicable UAE enforcement framework, including the reciprocity requirement.

The practical consequence is that an English maintenance order does not acquire enforceability in the UAE merely because the two countries have judicial cooperation arrangements. The creditor must still establish that the conditions for recognition under UAE law have been met.

Why Maintenance Orders Are Different

Maintenance claims can be more difficult to enforce than a straightforward final money judgment because family orders often contain continuing obligations. A court may order monthly payments, provide for future changes in circumstances or reserve the power to vary the amount. That creates a possible tension with the requirement that a foreign judgment be final and conclusive.

One important distinction is therefore between accrued arrears and future obligations. A sum of maintenance that has already fallen due and has been crystallised under the foreign order may present a clearer enforcement case than an obligation which remains subject to future variation by the issuing court. The structure of the original order, the law governing its variation and the manner in which the arrears are calculated can all become relevant before the UAE Execution Judge.

Public policy is another consideration. UAE law recognises maintenance obligations in family relationships, but a foreign order may contain forms of relief or calculations that do not correspond precisely with the UAE legal framework. The issue is not whether the UAE court agrees with the reasoning of the foreign court, but whether enforcement of the particular obligation would be incompatible with UAE public order or morals.

The current UAE Personal Status Law also gives maintenance obligations significant protection in the domestic system. Federal Decree-Law No. 41 of 2024, which took effect on April 15, 2025, provides that continuous alimony due to a wife, children and parents is a privileged debt taking precedence over other debts. It also contains detailed provisions governing spousal and other maintenance obligations. These provisions may be relevant when considering the treatment of maintenance claims within UAE enforcement proceedings.

A further issue arises where the creditor is considering whether to enforce the foreign order or start fresh proceedings in the UAE. The availability of a UAE claim will depend on jurisdiction, the parties' circumstances and the applicable personal-status law. A foreign judgment does not necessarily remove every possible avenue for seeking relief in the UAE, but the existence of earlier proceedings and orders must be carefully disclosed and considered to avoid inconsistent claims or judgments.

What enforcement can achieve

Once an enforceable order has been obtained in the UAE, the creditor can make use of the execution machinery available under UAE law. Depending on the circumstances, enforcement may involve attachment of assets, garnishment of amounts held by third parties, attachment of property and deductions from salary. UAE law gives maintenance debts priority in certain situations when competing claims are made against a debtor's earnings.

The Civil Procedure Code provides that salaries and wages are generally protected from attachment beyond prescribed limits, but it gives priority to maintenance debts where claims overlap. The law also contains specific provisions allowing a travel ban in appropriate cases. Notably, the Dh10,000 minimum ordinarily applicable to a travel-ban application does not apply to an established maintenance debt.

Personal-status execution is handled under a dedicated framework in the Civil Procedure Code. Article 227 places responsibility for executing personal-status writs and decisions with the Personal Status Execution Judge and expressly provides for the issuance of travel-ban orders. This can be particularly relevant in cases involving continuing family obligations, although the availability and form of individual enforcement measures will depend on the facts of each case.

The enforcement stage is therefore not simply a matter of producing a foreign decree and asking the UAE courts to collect the money. The creditor must first establish that the order qualifies for recognition and that the procedural and documentary requirements have been met. Only then can the wider execution machinery be brought into play.

The Practical Choice For Parties

For a creditor holding a foreign maintenance order, the most important work may take place before an execution petition is filed. The original judgment, proof of jurisdiction, evidence of proper service, confirmation of finality, details of accrued arrears and the documents establishing the amount due may all prove important. Legalisation and Arabic translation should also be addressed at an early stage rather than after enforcement proceedings have begun.

The country in which the order was issued is equally significant because it may determine whether a treaty mechanism is available or whether the case will proceed under the general provisions of the UAE Civil Procedure Code. India, GCC states and Arab countries covered by the relevant regional conventions may therefore present a different legal pathway from countries for which no enforcement convention applies.

The UAE provides a clear legal route for enforcing foreign maintenance and alimony orders, but the process remains fact-sensitive. Jurisdiction, finality, due process, reciprocity, treaty coverage and public policy can all determine whether an overseas order can be converted into an executable obligation against a debtor in the Emirates.

For both sides of a cross-border family dispute, the important point is that enforcement does not begin with the debtor's bank account or salary. It begins with the foreign judgment itself and whether that judgment can satisfy the legal requirements for recognition in the UAE. The way the original proceedings were conducted, the exact wording of the order and the status of the arrears can ultimately be as important as the location of the debtor's assets.

A nanny convicted of assaulting a three-year-old boy in her care has been ordered by an Abu Dhabi court to pay Dh10,000 in compensation to the child’s mother.

The nanny had earlier been sentenced to one month in jail, with the sentence suspended, and fined Dh3,000 after being convicted of endangering the child’s physical safety.

The assault left the boy with multiple scratches across his chest and below his jaw, according to a medical report submitted during the criminal proceedings and later relied upon in the compensation case.

Following the final criminal judgement, the boy’s mother filed a civil claim seeking Dh25,000 in compensation for the material and moral harm suffered by her and her son.

Criminal Conviction

The mother told the Abu Dhabi Family, Civil and Administrative Claims Court that she had entrusted the nanny with the child’s care and protection while she was away. Instead, she said, the defendant had physically assaulted the boy and breached the responsibility placed in her.

The nanny denied that she had been responsible for caring for the child, claiming that she had been employed only as a driver. She also argued that the proceedings had been brought maliciously amid a dispute over unpaid wages and other contractual matters.

She asked the civil court to reject the compensation claim, maintaining that the allegations arose from the employment dispute rather than any assault.

The court rejected the defence, finding that the issue of whether the assault had occurred had already been conclusively determined by the Abu Dhabi criminal court.

The judges said the final criminal conviction could not be challenged or reconsidered in the subsequent civil proceedings. The unlawful act forming the basis of the compensation claim was the same offence for which the nanny had already been convicted.

As a result, her denial of responsibility could not alter the legal position established by the final criminal judgement.

Compensation Award

In assessing the compensation, the court considered the injuries documented in the medical report as well as the medical expenses resulting from the assault.

The judges also took into account the emotional distress suffered by the child and his mother following the incident. The court found that the assault had caused pain and distress and undermined the trust placed in the person responsible for the child’s safety.

The court therefore ordered the nanny to pay Dh10,000 to the mother as compensation for material and moral damages, in addition to court fees and legal expenses.

The award will carry annual interest of 4% from the date the civil judgement becomes final until full payment, provided that the accumulated interest does not exceed the principal amount awarded.

Dubai’s highest court has ruled that a wife may bring a fresh divorce-for-harm claim before the UAE courts even after an earlier case was rejected abroad, provided she can establish that the alleged harm continued or occurred again.

The case involved a woman who filed a personal status claim in Dubai seeking a divorce on grounds of harm, together with financial and custody-related claims concerning the couple’s child. She alleged that her husband had abandoned her, failed to provide maintenance and left her to meet household and childcare expenses on her own.

The woman had previously initiated proceedings in Sudan and Egypt. She argued that the circumstances had changed after those proceedings and that the alleged marital harm had continued or intensified.

Divorce For Harm Under UAE Law

Under UAE personal status law, divorce for harm, known as darar in Arabic, is a fault-based mechanism through which a wife may seek to end a marriage by establishing that her husband’s conduct has caused harm making continuation of the relationship impossible.

Federal Law No. 28 of 2005 provides for divorce where a wife can prove harm arising from her husband’s conduct. Depending on the circumstances, such harm can include abandonment, failure to provide maintenance, verbal or physical abuse and other forms of mistreatment that make married life untenable.

The focus is not simply on whether a previous dispute existed, but on whether the circumstances giving rise to the claim can be established through evidence before the court.

Husband Challenges Dubai Proceedings

The husband opposed the Dubai proceedings, arguing that the dispute had already been dealt with by courts in other countries and should not be reopened before the Dubai courts.

The Dubai court rejected that argument, finding that the earlier foreign rulings did not prevent it from examining the new claim. The court distinguished between a claim based on the same facts that had already been adjudicated and one arising from continuing or renewed harm.

The ruling therefore recognises that the dismissal of a divorce-for-harm case in another jurisdiction does not necessarily prevent a subsequent claim in Dubai where the circumstances relied upon are continuing or have developed further.

Continuing Harm Can Create A New Claim

The decision highlights the importance of the timing and nature of the alleged harm in personal status disputes. Where conduct continues after an earlier case has concluded, or where new incidents occur, those developments may form the basis of a separate legal claim.

For spouses involved in cross-border family disputes, the ruling also illustrates how proceedings in different jurisdictions may interact. A previous foreign judgment does not automatically eliminate the possibility of seeking relief before UAE courts when a claimant can establish a new or continuing cause of action.

The decision places emphasis on the facts existing when the UAE proceedings are considered and the evidence produced to establish the alleged harm. As a result, developments in a marital relationship after an earlier foreign case may have legal significance when determining whether a fresh claim can be brought.

Marriages between spouses of different nationalities are commonplace in the United Arab Emirates. A British national married to an Indian citizen, a French resident married to a Filipino, or a Lebanese expatriate married to a Russian — such families are the norm rather than the exception in Dubai and Abu Dhabi. Yet when one spouse dies, these families can confront a question of considerable legal complexity: which country’s law governs the inheritance of assets located in the UAE?

The answer is rarely intuitive. It can depend on the religion and nationality of the deceased, the nature and location of the assets, whether a will exists and where it was registered, and the interaction between UAE legislation and the conflict-of-laws rules of the relevant foreign jurisdictions. This article sets out the principal framework following the reforms introduced in recent years.

The Default Position Under UAE Law

Historically, inheritance in the UAE was governed primarily by the Personal Status Law, with succession based on Sharia principles in cases falling within that framework. Under the rules of fixed shares, an estate is distributed among prescribed heirs according to defined entitlements. A surviving wife, for example, may receive one-eighth where the deceased has an inheriting descendant, while parents, siblings and other relatives may receive defined shares depending on the circumstances. The current federal Personal Status Law, Federal Decree-Law No. 41 of 2024, retains detailed Sharia-based inheritance provisions, including fixed shares for spouses and other heirs.

For expatriate families accustomed to systems in which the surviving spouse may inherit most or all of an estate — as can occur under English intestacy rules or through different matrimonial-property regimes elsewhere — the operation of UAE succession rules can come as an unwelcome surprise, particularly if no effective estate-planning arrangements have been made. Bank accounts and other assets may also become subject to estate administration procedures after death, while questions concerning guardianship and the care of minor children may require separate consideration under the applicable legal framework.

The Choice Of Foreign Law

UAE law provides mechanisms under which non-UAE nationals can invoke their personal or home-country law in relevant family and succession matters. Under the current Personal Status Law, the federal framework applies to non-UAE citizens unless one of them insists on applying their own law, or another law has been agreed to be applied, where permitted by UAE legislation. This means that nationality and the applicable foreign law can be important factors in determining how a cross-border succession is handled.

At the same time, non-Muslim expatriates have access to separate civil-law mechanisms. Federal Decree-Law No. 41 of 2022 on Civil Personal Status established civil rules for non-Muslims within its scope, including succession provisions under which, in the absence of a will, 50 per cent of the estate passes to the surviving spouse and the remainder is divided equally among the children. Abu Dhabi also operates a civil wills and inheritance framework for non-Muslim foreigners.

The result is that forced-heirship principles are not necessarily the only route available to expatriate families. However, the protection of a particular succession arrangement is not automatic. The precise legal regime, the deceased’s status, the wording and validity of any will, and the nature of the assets must all be considered.

Mixed Nationalities: Whose Law Governs?

Where spouses hold different nationalities, an essential principle must be understood: succession is considered in relation to the deceased, rather than simply to the nationality of the couple as a unit. Each spouse’s estate is a separate succession and may therefore be governed by a different legal framework. In a marriage between a German and an Indian national, for example, the German spouse’s estate and the Indian spouse’s estate may be subject to different rules, depending on the applicable UAE and foreign laws. Indian succession law itself may involve different statutory regimes, including the Hindu Succession Act and the Indian Succession Act, depending on the circumstances.

Complexity can increase where the deceased’s home country applies its own conflict-of-laws rules. Some jurisdictions connect succession to nationality, while others give greater weight to domicile or habitual residence. Some legal systems also distinguish between movable and immovable property. A renvoi — where the foreign law referred to by the UAE rules refers the matter back to UAE law, or onward to another legal system — can therefore arise in genuinely cross-border estates.

Real Estate: The Special Case

Immovable property occupies a special position in succession law worldwide, and UAE property is no exception. Land and buildings are closely connected to the law and jurisdiction of the place where they are situated, making the treatment of UAE real estate a particularly important issue in cross-border estate planning. The extent to which a foreign-law election affects UAE property must therefore be considered alongside the applicable UAE legislation, the relevant emirate’s procedures and the nature of the will.

The practical significance is obvious. For many expatriate couples, the family home or an investment property in Dubai or Abu Dhabi represents the largest asset in the estate. Whether that property ultimately passes to the surviving spouse or is distributed among a wider class of heirs may depend on the applicable succession regime, the deceased’s will and the legal treatment of the property. These issues are better addressed during the planning stage than left to be resolved after death.

Wills: DIFC, Abu Dhabi And Local Registration

The UAE offers several mechanisms through which expatriates can record testamentary wishes and establish a framework for the administration of their estates. The DIFC Wills Service provides a dedicated wills and probate regime for eligible non-Muslims, with rules governing the registration and enforcement of wills and the subsequent probate process. DIFC materials also confirm that the framework is used for succession planning involving Dubai and other UAE assets.

The Abu Dhabi Judicial Department operates a civil wills system and provides procedures for registering wills for non-Muslims. Its official guidance states that a registered will can cover the distribution of the testator’s UAE estate and that wills may also address assets situated outside the UAE. The department also provides standard will forms in English and Arabic.

For mixed-nationality couples, mirror wills — separate wills for each spouse, coordinated with one another and with any wills made in their home countries — can be an important estate-planning instrument. Care is required, however, to ensure that a later will does not inadvertently revoke an earlier instrument covering assets in another jurisdiction, and that each will satisfies the applicable requirements concerning form, capacity, execution and registration.

Recognition And Administration Across Borders

A succession rarely ends at the UAE’s borders. Estates commonly comprise UAE bank accounts and property alongside assets in the spouses’ home countries, with each jurisdiction applying its own procedures to assets located within its territory. A foreign probate order or succession document may therefore require recognition or additional procedures before it can be relied upon in the UAE, while a UAE order may similarly need to satisfy the requirements of a foreign jurisdiction where assets are held.

This is why estate plans for mixed-nationality families are best designed as a coordinated whole rather than as a collection of unconnected national arrangements. A will prepared in one country should be reviewed against any UAE will, property arrangements, banking structures and succession documents in other jurisdictions. Particular attention should also be given to the possibility that different legal systems may apply different rules to the same family relationship or category of asset.

Concluding Observations

For mixed-nationality couples in the UAE, the governing inheritance law is not necessarily a single answer but a matrix of factors. It can vary according to the deceased’s nationality and religion, the applicable UAE legal framework, the character and location of each asset, and the choices made through valid estate-planning documents. Recent reforms have expanded the succession options available to non-Muslim residents and have established dedicated civil mechanisms for wills and inheritance in relevant circumstances.

For families with cross-border assets, the central lesson is that succession planning should be undertaken before a death occurs and reviewed periodically thereafter. Marriage, the birth or adoption of children, the acquisition of UAE real estate, a move to another country, or changes in the law can all affect the effectiveness of an existing estate plan. In mixed-nationality families in particular, coordinated advice covering the UAE and every relevant foreign jurisdiction can help ensure that the intended succession arrangements are legally coherent and capable of being administered when they are needed.

The United Arab Emirates is home to one of the world's most internationally diverse populations, and its family law framework has evolved significantly to reflect that reality. For non-Muslim expatriates — whether Hindu, Christian, or of any other faith or none — the question of how a marriage may be dissolved in the UAE, and which law may apply, is no longer answered by a single statute. It is governed by a layered framework involving civil personal status legislation, the Personal Status Law and conflict-of-laws principles that can allow foreign law to be applied in UAE courts.

This article explains how that framework operates and what non-Muslim residents should understand before commencing divorce proceedings in the UAE.

The Legal Framework: Two Parallel Regimes

Family matters involving non-Muslims in the UAE can be governed by two principal legal frameworks.

The first is the civil personal status regime established by Federal Decree-Law No. 41 of 2022 on Civil Personal Status. The federal law applies to non-Muslim citizens and non-Muslim foreign residents in matters including marriage, divorce, inheritance and child custody, subject to its scope and provisions. It provides a civil framework for resolving personal status matters and permits non-Muslim couples to initiate divorce proceedings without having to establish fault.

The second is Federal Decree-Law No. 41 of 2024 on the Issuance of the Personal Status Law, which came into force six months after publication. The law applies to non-UAE citizens unless one of them requests the application of their own law, or another law is agreed for application where permitted by UAE legislation. This creates an important choice-of-law dimension in cases involving foreign nationals.

The practical consequence is significant. Depending on the circumstances of the parties, their nationality, the nature of their marriage and any applicable election of law, a non-Muslim expatriate couple divorcing in the UAE may proceed under the UAE civil personal status framework or may seek the application of another law where UAE legislation permits it.

Civil Divorce Under The Civil Personal Status Law

The civil regime represents a significant departure from traditional personal status procedures. One of its central features is that either spouse may unilaterally request a divorce without having to prove harm, fault or a particular matrimonial ground. The law expressly recognises the right of both husband and wife to seek divorce.

Civil divorce proceedings are also excluded from referral to Family Guidance Committees. Instead, proceedings under the Civil Personal Status Law are presented directly to the court, with the legislation providing for the court to consider the divorce at the first hearing. This distinguishes the civil procedure from proceedings governed by the general Personal Status Law.

Financial claims following divorce are dealt with under the applicable legal framework and may involve consideration of the parties' financial circumstances and other statutory factors. The civil regime also provides for joint custody, with men and women having equal rights to assume joint custody of a minor child until the child reaches the age of 18, after which the child has freedom of choice under the law.

The civil framework also provides a route for non-Muslim residents to conclude civil marriages in the UAE. Federal legislation and implementing regulations establish the procedures governing such marriages and their subsequent personal status consequences.

In Abu Dhabi, non-Muslim personal status matters are also addressed through the emirate's dedicated civil family law framework and judicial mechanisms. This reflects the UAE's broader development of civil family-law procedures for its international resident population.

The Application Of Home-Country Law In UAE Courts

The alternative route rests on the UAE's conflict-of-laws framework and the provisions of the 2024 Personal Status Law. Under Article 1, the law applies to non-UAE citizens unless one of them requests the application of their own law or another law is agreed for application, where permitted by UAE legislation. The courts also have jurisdiction over personal status claims involving foreigners who have a domicile, place of residence or place of work in the UAE.

For particular communities, this possibility can have significant consequences because the substantive rules governing divorce, maintenance, matrimonial property and related issues may differ considerably between jurisdictions.

Hindu expatriates. Parties may seek the application of Indian personal law where the relevant legal requirements are satisfied. Depending on the nature of the marriage, this may involve legislation such as the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 or, for marriages solemnised under that statute, the Special Marriage Act 1954. The grounds for divorce, maintenance and other matrimonial consequences under Indian law can differ materially from the UAE civil framework, making the applicable law an important issue at the outset.

Christian expatriates. Christians from jurisdictions with distinct matrimonial or personal laws may likewise seek the application of their home-country law where permitted. Where a marriage was solemnised religiously abroad, questions concerning the form and validity of the marriage, as well as the grounds available for dissolution, may depend on the applicable law and the circumstances of the case.

Filipino expatriates. The position of Filipino nationals requires particular care because Philippine law generally does not provide for divorce between Filipino citizens. A UAE court may nevertheless dissolve a marriage under the UAE legal framework where it has jurisdiction and the applicable law permits it. Whether and how such a divorce is subsequently recognised in the Philippines is a separate question governed by Philippine law and judicial proceedings. A UAE decree therefore does not automatically determine its civil effects in the Philippines.

Two procedural considerations apply across nationalities. First, where a party relies on foreign law, the relevant law and supporting documents must be properly established before the UAE court, with translation and legalisation requirements potentially applying. Secondly, the choice or assertion of applicable law should be addressed at the beginning of proceedings because changing the legal basis of a case after it has progressed may create procedural and substantive complications.

Recognition Of UAE Divorces Abroad

A divorce that is valid in the UAE is not automatically effective in every other jurisdiction. Recognition abroad depends on the private international law of the country where recognition is sought.

Indian courts, for example, examine foreign matrimonial decrees against principles established in Indian jurisprudence, including questions concerning jurisdiction, the grounds on which the divorce was granted and whether those grounds are recognised under the applicable Indian matrimonial law. The precise requirements depend on the circumstances and the legislation governing the marriage.

In the United Kingdom and other jurisdictions, recognition may depend on statutory rules concerning matters such as domicile, habitual residence, jurisdiction and procedural fairness. In the Philippines, a foreign divorce involving a Filipino citizen may require judicial recognition before it can produce civil effects under Philippine law.

For internationally mobile families, therefore, the enforceability of a divorce decree in every relevant jurisdiction can be as important as obtaining the decree itself. This may include countries where the parties reside, where their children live, where substantial assets are located or where either party may subsequently seek to remarry.

Custody, Children And The 2025 Reforms

Whichever legal framework applies to the divorce, issues involving children remain subject to the applicable UAE rules and the best interests of the child. The 2024 Personal Status Law, which took effect in 2025, contains provisions governing custody, parental responsibilities and travel.

Under the law, custody generally ends when the child reaches 18, while a child aged 15 or above may choose which parent to reside with unless the court determines otherwise in the child's best interests. The legislation also contains rules governing travel with children and the use and retention of children's official documents.

These provisions need to be considered alongside the legal framework governing the divorce itself. A choice of foreign law concerning the dissolution of marriage does not necessarily mean that every issue concerning children, residence, travel or enforcement will be determined exclusively by that foreign law.

Concluding Observations

The UAE now provides non-Muslim expatriates with a more developed range of legal mechanisms for the dissolution of marriage, including a civil framework designed for non-Muslim residents and the possibility, where legally permitted, of applying a foreign law. The two routes can differ in procedure, substantive consequences and the way a resulting decree is treated abroad.

The appropriate legal framework depends on the parties' nationality, the place and form of their marriage, the applicable law, the location of their children and assets, and their future plans. These factors can also affect whether a UAE divorce will subsequently be recognised in another country.

Given the interaction between UAE law, foreign personal laws and recognition rules in other jurisdictions, parties contemplating divorce proceedings in the UAE should obtain advice on jurisdiction, applicable law and overseas recognition before taking a procedural step. A divorce decree may resolve the marriage in the UAE, but its wider legal consequences can extend well beyond the jurisdiction in which it was granted.

Kuwait has introduced new regulations governing the exercise of judicial control powers by qualified employees of the Protection Centers Department, strengthening procedures for responding to domestic violence while protecting the privacy and rights of victims.

Minister of Social Affairs, Family and Childhood Affairs Dr Amthal Al-Huwailah announced the issuance of a ministerial decision setting out the rules and procedures for employees of the Protection Centers Department at the Supreme Council for Family Affairs to exercise judicial control powers. The decision implements Decree Law No. 11 of 2026 on protection from domestic violence.

Speaking to the Kuwait News Agency (KUNA), Al-Huwailah said the decision was designed to enable legally and socially qualified Kuwaiti personnel to protect vulnerable groups, monitor domestic violence cases and respond to them promptly within a framework based on justice, confidentiality and integrity.

Under the new rules, employees granted judicial authority must be Kuwaiti citizens of good character and reputation and provide a recent criminal record. They must also hold at least a bachelor’s degree in psychological counselling, social counselling or law.

Applicants are required to complete specialised training in co-ordination with the Kuwait Institute for Judicial and Legal Studies. After successfully completing the course, they must take the legal oath before the head of the Supreme Council for Family Affairs before assuming their duties.

The authorised employees will have powers intended to help protect victims and ensure that cases are dealt with promptly. These include monitoring domestic violence cases, inspecting locations they are legally authorised to enter, documenting observations and information in official reports, requesting relevant documents, preserving evidence and referring reports to the competent authorities without delay.

The decision also establishes restrictions on how these powers may be exercised. Authorised employees are prohibited from using their position or influence for personal gain or interfering in family relationships beyond the scope of their official duties.

They are also barred from making media statements or publishing photographs that could disclose the identities of victims. The restrictions are intended to protect the privacy of individuals involved in domestic violence cases.

Employees must immediately withdraw from handling a case and inform their direct supervisor if circumstances arise that could create a suspected conflict of interest involving any party connected with the incident. The requirement is aimed at maintaining neutrality and objectivity in the handling of cases.

Strict confidentiality is also required in relation to all data, correspondence and documents connected with domestic violence cases. The obligation continues even after an employee leaves the service.

The relevant department will prepare an annual statistical report to evaluate the protection system and identify practical challenges in its implementation. The report must not include information that could disclose the identities of victims.

Al-Huwailah said the decision marked an important step towards institutionalising social and legal work in Kuwait and creating a secure legal framework to protect the dignity of families and their members, particularly children, women, older people and people with disabilities.

An Abu Dhabi court has ordered a man to pay a woman Dh48,700 and a further Dh10,000 in compensation after finding that he had led her to believe he intended to marry her and obtained money from her over a period of time.

The Abu Dhabi Family, Civil and Administrative Claims Court heard that the man received cash and bank transfers from the woman after promising to repay the money once his financial circumstances improved and his banking transactions were completed.

The woman filed a civil case seeking Dh48,800, which she said represented the outstanding debt, along with Dh20,000 in compensation for material, moral and psychological harm allegedly caused by the man's deception, bad-faith delay and repeated failure to repay the money.

She also sought annual interest of 5 per cent from the date the case was filed until the amount was fully settled, as well as court costs and lawyers' fees.

After reviewing the evidence, the court ordered the man to pay Dh48,700 to the woman, together with Dh10,000 in compensation.