Is it possible to overturn a Supreme Court’s Judgment?
Dispute Resolution / UAE
Mohamed AbdelsabourSenior Counsel,Dispute Resolution
This article aims to explore the legal and practical differences in contesting Court of Cassation judgments under the old and new Civil Procedure Codes in the UAE. I will delve into the implications of these changes on future cassation cases, highlighting how the new Civil Procedure Code of 2022 reflects the UAE’s commitment to a progressive legal framework that rectifies the limitations of the past.
The UAE Civil Procedure Code of 1992, formally known as Federal Law No. 11 of 1992, served as the backbone of the country’s judicial procedures for three decades. It provided a structured legal framework for litigants to contest judgments, including the mechanisms for appeals and judicial review. Under this code, the primary avenue for challenging a judgment was through the standard appeals process.
However, the 1992 code had its limitations for a long while, particularly in the context of contesting decisions of the Court of Cassation. Once a judgment was issued by this court of appeal, the opportunities for correction were significantly limited. The only recourse for litigants who believed that a judgment was flawed due to a misapplication of the law, or procedural errors was to pursue cassation appeal before the respective Cassation Court under strict and narrowly defined circumstances.
Articles like Article 173 of the 1992 Code allowed for such petitions, but these were often restricted to clear cases of legal or procedural violations, leaving many litigants without a remedy in situations where judgments were perceived as unfair or erroneous.
Over time, some courts in the UAE developed an uncommon (but fair and equitable) local practice of accepting challenges to their judgements where a clear and serious error in procedure would exhibit itself. This was most notably seen in Abu Dhabi Court of Cassation Case (ADCC). For example, in case No. 1 of 2018 Administrative before the ADCC whereby one of the parties challenged the decision of the ADCC to dismiss their case on the grounds that the court erroneously found that the appellant did not pay the court fees prior to its deliberation on the matter when in fact, it did pay them.
Despite that, that judgment was final and there was no typical legal mechanism to challenge it. However, the ADCC considered an application of reconsideration which was based on fairness and equity, and in the judgment of the challenge to the dismissal, the court stated the following:
“Whereas this argument is in order, because although the origin is that there is no way to appeal against the rulings of the Court of Cassation by any means of appeal, as the conditions for seeking reconsideration of its judgment issued at the origin of the dispute would not be met in the legally prescribed manner, the Court of Cassation, in appreciation of the lack of another means to review the material error that may affect the rights of some litigants, has been enacted in order to reach judicial integrity and achieve the proper administration of justice. The judiciary accepts requests for reconsideration of the appeal if it finds that information is false or inadvertently or unintentionally a material nature of the case has been marred while it was challenged in the process of adjudication, which led to the ruling of its non-acceptance.”
Notwithstanding this, the underlying rigid structure for the old law still led to instances where litigants felt that justice was not fully served. The lack of comprehensive legal mechanisms to correct or challenge certain cassation judgments often resulted in final decisions that some considered unjust.
Recognizing the need for a more adaptable and just legal framework, the UAE introduced the new Civil Procedure Code in 2022, formally known as Federal Decree by Law No. 42 of 2022concerning the Civil Procedures Law. This modernized code is a testament to the UAE’s commitment to legal and societal progression, addressing the shortcomings of its predecessor by introducing mechanisms to rectify errors and ensure fair outcomes in all levels of the judiciary, including the Court of Cassation.
The 2022 code introduced significant reforms aimed at resolving longstanding issues, one of which was the potential for errors in cassation judgments to go uncorrected. By expanding the grounds and procedures for judicial review, the new code offers a more robust system for ensuring that justice is not only served but also seen to be served, even at the highest levels of the judicial process.
One of the most pivotal changes in the 2022 Civil Procedure Code is the introduction of Article 190, which addresses the court's ability to revoke its own decisions or final judgments under specific circumstances. Article 190 of the 2022 Civil Procedure Code represents a significant advancement in the UAE’s legal framework, particularly in its approach to judicial review and the correction of errors in final judgments. It allows Cassation Courts to revoke their own decisions or final judgments (ab initio or based on the aggrieved party’s application), if they were issued based on procedural errors, the application of outdated laws, or violations of established judicial principles.
The inclusion of Article 190 also underscores the UAE's commitment to ensuring that its legal system is both fair and adaptable, capable of correcting its course when necessary. This not only enhances the accountability of the judiciary, but also provides litigants with a vital recourse to challenge judgments that would have previously been unassailable.
A practical example of how Article 190 can be applied is illustrated in a recent case representing one of our clients. In that scenario, the ADCC issued a judgment to dismiss our case because it erroneously found that the statement of cassation appeal was not duly signed by a lawyer who is admitted to practice law before the ADCC. It held that the concerned lawyer should affix his/her signature on a specific part of the cassation appeal memo.
Under the old Civil Procedure Code, our client would have had little to no recourse to challenge this decision. However, with the introduction of Article 190, we were able to petition the ADCC to strike the issued judgment and return it for further deliberation, under a panel of new judges. We asserted that that judgment is defective and tainted with uncertainty. We further submitted that the contested judgment was stuck to excessive formalities without regard to the practice of the court. Simply put, the court ignored the fact that a certified lawyer duly signed and filed the cassation appeal and arbitrarily decided to penalize the appellant for not following an unprescribed format of appeal (which is unjust).
Rightfully, the General Assembly of the ADCC agreed with our position that the ADCC misinterpreted and inaccurately applied the legal principle it relied on to dismiss our case. Consequently, it revoked the contested judgment and remanded the case to another tribunal before the ADCC for reconsideration.
This case exemplifies the practical benefits of the new code, demonstrating how Article 190 offers a crucial safety net for ensuring that justice is served even when errors occur in the highest court. It also sets a new standard for judicial accountability in the UAE. Future cases that fall within the parameters of this article can expect a more thorough review process, reducing the likelihood of unjust outcomes.
Article 190 of the 2022 Civil Procedure Code could be seen as an indication that the UAE justice system is evolving in a way that brings it closer to the principles of common law. Traditionally, the UAE has operated under a civil law system, where codified statutes and legal codes are paramount, and judicial decisions do not generally create binding precedents, but rather serve as legal guidance for future judges. However, Article 190 introduces a mechanism that allows courts to revoke their own final judgments in certain circumstances where the judgment is in violation of judicial principles established or adopted by the Courts of Cassation or any or all of the Courts’ tribunals.
The inclusion of judicial principles as a ground for revoking judgments under Article 190 could indicate that the UAE is embracing a more flexible and adaptive judicial process. By acknowledging the importance of judicial principles —something that typically does not serve as a binding source of law in civil law systems— Article 190 allows for a level of judicial self-correction that aligns more closely with common law practices.
However, the true impact of this shift will only be revealed through the practical application of Article 190 in the courts. If UAE courts begin to actively invoke this article to correct judgments that violate judicial principles, it could signal a broader movement toward a legal system where judicial decisions and the principles they establish play a more significant role. This would mark a significant evolution in the UAE’s legal tradition, blending the adaptability and precedent-driven nature of common law with the structured codification of civil law.
The transition from the Civil Procedure Code of 1992 to that of 2022 marks a critical evolution in the UAE’s judicial landscape. By addressing the limitations of the past and introducing new mechanisms like Article 190, the 2022 code ensures that justice is not only achieved but also sustained over time. These changes reflect the UAE’s dedication to legal reform and its commitment to providing a fair and just legal system for all. The implications of these reforms are profound, offering a more robust framework for contesting cassation judgments and ensuring that errors can be corrected, thereby safeguarding the integrity of the judicial process for future generations.
For further information,please contact Mohamed Gaber Abdelsabour.
Published in October 2024
