Saudi Arabia Courts Reject Nearly 90% of Arbitration Annulment Applications

Saudi Arabia’s courts have rejected nearly 90 per cent of applications seeking to annul arbitration awards, according to new research that offers one of the clearest indicators yet of the Kingdom’s increasingly arbitration-friendly legal environment.

The findings, published in a comprehensive report by the Saudi Center for Commercial Arbitration (SCCA), are based on an analysis of 967 arbitration-related appellate decisions issued by Saudi Courts of Appeal between January 2023 and June 2025. The study provides fresh empirical insight into how Saudi courts interact with arbitration proceedings and could influence international parties considering Saudi Arabia as a seat for dispute resolution.

The report, titled Arbitration in Saudi Arabia, was prepared by the SCCA research team in connection with the forthcoming UNCITRAL Digest of Case Law on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. It also examines proposed legislative reforms contained in the Draft Saudi Arbitration Law published for public consultation in late 2025.

The most striking finding is the high rejection rate for annulment requests. Out of 194 annulment applications reviewed during the study period — representing just over 20 per cent of all appellate decisions — 174 were dismissed. That translates into an 89.7 per cent rejection rate.

Only 20 applications succeeded, with 12 resulting in full annulment and eight in partial annulment.

According to the report, the successful cases were largely confined to procedural failings, such as breaches of statutory deadlines or instances where one of the exclusive grounds under Article 50 of the Saudi Arbitration Law was established. Importantly, the courts consistently treated those grounds as exhaustive, refusing to revisit factual findings or re-examine the merits of disputes.

That approach is likely to reassure international investors and commercial parties, particularly those concerned about post-award risks.

One of the longstanding concerns among foreign businesses has been the possibility of arbitral awards being challenged on public policy or Sharia law grounds. However, the report suggests those concerns may be overstated.

It found that reliance on Sharia as a ground for annulment was “extremely limited”, with only one recorded case of partial annulment on that basis—just 0.5 per cent of the total annulment applications. Public policy was cited successfully in only three cases, or 1.55 per cent.

The wider trend appears equally consistent. Across SCCA studies covering more than 3,300 judgments between 2017 and 2025, a total of 91.7 per cent of annulment applications were rejected, while only 2.3 per cent involved successful challenges based on Sharia or public policy.

The report highlights that Saudi courts apply these grounds in narrowly defined circumstances. In one 2023 case, an award was annulled because a tribunal recognised an unregistered lease as valid, conflicting with regulatory requirements. In another, a tribunal incorrectly applied a statutory limitation period.

A separate 2025 enforcement case also illustrated the courts’ careful balancing of Sharia compliance. While the court enforced most parts of an arbitral award involving a lease dispute, it refused to enforce a delay penalty because it amounted to riba, or interest, which is prohibited under Islamic law.

Beyond annulment statistics, the report points to a judiciary that intervenes sparingly in arbitration proceedings but steps in when due process or impartiality is compromised.

Saudi courts were found to respect party-agreed mechanisms for appointing arbitrators, intervening only in exceptional circumstances. Examples included cases where one party unilaterally appointed the full tribunal, where a tribunal was effectively composed of employees of one party, or where tribunal composition changed without notice to the opposing party.

Procedural fairness in service of notices also emerged as a key issue. Courts annulled awards where defective service deprived parties of the opportunity to defend themselves. In particular, the report noted that WhatsApp messages sent to numbers not officially registered by the receiving party were deemed insufficient for valid service.

The study also confirmed the Saudi courts’ recognition of the Kompetenz-Kompetenz principle, under which arbitral tribunals have the authority to determine their own jurisdiction. Courts upheld the separability of arbitration clauses, meaning the invalidity or termination of the underlying contract does not automatically invalidate the arbitration agreement.

In one notable 2025 Riyadh commercial case, the court ruled that an SCCA decision rejecting an arbitrator challenge could not itself be challenged in court, reinforcing the finality of institutional arbitration rules agreed by the parties.

Alongside its case law analysis, the report reviews proposed changes in the Draft Arbitration Law, which aim to modernise and streamline arbitration procedures.

Among the most significant reforms are the removal of the requirement for a sole arbitrator or tribunal chair to hold a Sharia or law degree, broader recognition of digital hearings and electronic signatures, expanded interim relief powers, and the formal introduction of emergency arbitrators.

The draft law also proposes multi-party proceedings, removes the default 12-month deadline for awards unless agreed by parties, and simplifies enforcement by eliminating the requirement to deposit awards with courts before enforcement is sought.

Legal analysts say these reforms could significantly reduce procedural disputes and bring Saudi Arabia more closely in line with established global arbitration hubs.

Taken together, the report paints a picture of a legal system increasingly geared toward supporting arbitration, with courts maintaining a restrained supervisory role and lawmakers pushing for greater efficiency and flexibility.

For businesses and investors, the findings signal a jurisdiction seeking to position itself as a competitive and credible seat for international arbitration.

 

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.