Ordinary Wear and Tear or Property Damage? Understanding a Tenant’s Liability Under Dubai Tenancy Law

When a tenancy in Dubai comes to an end, the condition in which the property is returned is frequently the final point of contention between landlord and tenant. Faded paint, worn flooring and minor surface marks are often treated by landlords as chargeable damage, while tenants regard the same conditions as the inevitable result of ordinary occupation.

This is not simply a matter of interpretation. Dubai’s tenancy legislation addresses the distinction directly, and correctly identifying which category a particular defect falls into determines whether a landlord may lawfully withhold any part of a security deposit.

 

The issue is among the most frequently litigated before the Rental Disputes Centre, precisely because the governing law, while clear in principle, leaves its application to the facts of each case.

 

The Legal Framework

 

The relationship between landlords and tenants in Dubai is governed by Law No. (26) of 2007 Regulating the Relationship between Landlords and Tenants in the Emirate of Dubai, as amended by Law No. (33) of 2008. The law allocates responsibility for the physical condition of a leased property according to fault, rather than according to how a defect appears during inspection. Article 15 requires the landlord to hand over the property in good condition at the outset of the lease, while Articles 16, 17, 19 and 21 govern how that condition is maintained during the tenancy and how the property must be returned at its end.

 

Landlord’s Responsibility for Wear and Tear

 

Article 16 provides that, unless the parties agree otherwise, the landlord remains responsible throughout the lease term for maintaining the property and repairing any defect or damage affecting the tenant’s intended use of it. Article 17 extends this further, making the landlord liable for any defect, damage, deficiency or wear and tear arising for reasons not attributable to the tenant, and expressly includes changes made by the landlord or by anyone acting under the landlord’s authority. Read together, these provisions place the cost of ordinary deterioration, the kind that accompanies time and reasonable use, on the landlord by default. A landlord who wishes to shift that cost onto the tenant should record the arrangement expressly in the lease contract; the law will not necessarily imply it.

 

Tenant’s Duty of Care

 

Article 19 requires the tenant to maintain the property as a reasonable person would maintain property of their own, and prohibits the tenant from carrying out restoration or alteration works without the landlord’s consent. This is a standard of reasonable care, not of preserving the property in its original condition. A tenant who occupies the property normally, uses its fixtures for their intended purpose and does not alter it without authorisation satisfies the obligation, even though the property will show the ordinary signs of having been lived in. The standard is breached by negligence or misuse, and just as often by allowing a minor issue, such as an unreported leak, to develop into a more serious defect through inaction.

 

Returning the Property at Lease End

 

Article 21 is the clearest statement of the distinction. On expiry of the lease, the tenant must return the property in the condition in which it was received, except for ordinary wear and tear or damage arising from causes beyond the tenant’s control. Article 23 adds a related rule: unless the parties agree otherwise, a tenant may not remove leasehold improvements made during the tenancy, so additions carried out with the landlord’s consent generally remain with the property when the tenant vacates. Where the parties cannot agree which category a specific defect falls into under Article 21, the matter may be referred for determination, a function now exercised by the Rental Disputes Centre, established under Decree No. (26) of 2013.

 

What Counts as Wear and Tear

 

The Tenancy Law does not define wear and tear by reference to a fixed list, and that omission is understandable, since the answer depends on the age of the finish in question and the length of occupation. In practice, and consistent with Rental Disputes Centre outcomes, deterioration treated as ordinary wear and tear includes fading paintwork, light scuffing to walls and flooring from daily use, worn carpet in high-traffic areas and gradual discolouration of grout. Defects that fall outside this category, and for which a tenant may properly be held liable, include unauthorised holes drilled into walls, broken tiles or fixtures, stains from spills or leaks that went unreported, and any alteration to the structure or finish carried out without the landlord’s consent. The relevant inquiry is not simply the appearance of the defect but its cause.

 

The Security Deposit

 

Article 20 entitles a landlord to hold a security deposit against the cost of maintaining the property, and it is when that deposit is returned that the distinction between wear and tear and damage becomes commercially significant. A landlord who deducts the cost of a full repaint or a full re-grouting exercise at the end of an ordinary tenancy, without evidence that the tenant caused the underlying condition through fault, may struggle to sustain that deduction if the tenant challenges it. A landlord who can identify a specific, tenant-caused defect exceeding what ordinary occupation would produce is in a materially stronger position to withhold the corresponding amount.

 

Evidence in Rental Disputes

 

Because the statute leaves wear and tear undefined, these disputes are resolved on the strength of the evidence rather than on the wording of the law alone. A signed condition report prepared at the start of the tenancy, supported by dated photographs and compared against the condition at handover, is generally among the most persuasive evidence available to either party. Maintenance records, written correspondence recording a reported defect, and invoices for repair work carried out during the tenancy also carry weight. A party relying solely on an undocumented account of the property’s original condition is at a material disadvantage against one who has kept contemporaneous records.

 

Avoiding a Dispute

 

Landlords are better placed to protect their position by commissioning a written, photographed condition report at the start of the tenancy and repeating the exercise when the tenant vacates, since this converts a subjective assessment into a documented comparison. Tenants should retain their own copy of that report, photograph the property when moving in, and notify the landlord in writing of any defect as it arises rather than waiting until the tenancy ends. Where a landlord intends to depart from the default position under Article 16 by shifting a category of maintenance onto the tenant, that departure should be recorded expressly in the lease contract, since the Tenancy Law will otherwise apply its default allocation.