ISSN 2663-0583 (Online)
ISSN 2663-0575 (Print)
  • Home
  • Procedural Rules for Smart Trials in the UAE: Aspirations and Reality
"

Procedural Rules for Smart Trials in the UAE: Aspirations and Reality

Summary: 1. Introduction. – 2. Research Methodology. – 3. Smart Trials in UAE Courts: Conceptual Foundations and Operational Framework. – 3.1 Definition of Digital Litigation. – 3.2 Advantages and Limitations of Digital Litigation. – 3.3 Digital adversarial direct action. – 3.3.1 Initiation of Digital Litigation by Decision of the Competent Authority. – 3.3.2 Agreement-Based Initiation of Digital Litigation. – 4. The Functioning of Litigation through Digital Means. – 4.1 Digital adversarial procedures. – 4.1.1 Case registration and service of notice via digital means. – 4.1.2 Submission and Exchange of Evidence Digitally. – 4.1.3 Conduct of Hearings and Pleadings within a Digital Framework. – 4.2 Judgments and Orders by Digital Means and Their Appeal. – 5. Conclusions

Full Text:

DOI

HTML Abstract About Author(s) References Reviews Українською

  

Background: This study analyses the procedural rules governing smart trials (digital litigation) in the UAE, with a particular focus on their current implementation and potential future development. It explores the legal and technical underpinnings of digital litigation and evaluates the compatibility of the UAE’s framework with the goals of procedural efficiency and access to justice.

Methods: Structured into two chapters, this study first examines the conceptual foundations of smart trials and their modes of initiation, before turning to an analysis of litigation processes conducted via digital means. It employs a descriptive-analytical methodology to evaluate the technical feasibility and legal validity of these practices. It specifically focuses on Ministerial Decision No. 260 of 2019, assessing its framework for remote civil litigation and the extent to which it integrates electronic communication and procedural digitisation.

Results and Conclusions: The study evaluates the scope and effectiveness of the ministerial decision in regulating digital litigation, including lawsuit registration, procedural steps, judicial deliberations, issuance of judgments, and temporary orders. It identifies several gaps in the UAE’s digital litigation system, particularly the lack of a comprehensive legislative framework and uniform digital procedures. The research concludes by recommending the enactment of dedicated legislation to standardise and regulate digital judicial proceedings. These recommendations include creating a secure digital system for litigation, clarifying procedural rules for third-party intervention, expanding digital appeal provisions, and defining the competent authority for system-wide implementation in exceptional circumstances.

Abstract

 

Background: This study analyses the procedural rules governing smart trials (digital litigation) in the UAE, with a particular focus on their current implementation and potential future development. It explores the legal and technical underpinnings of digital litigation and evaluates the compatibility of the UAE’s framework with the goals of procedural efficiency and access to justice.

Methods: Structured into two chapters, this study first examines the conceptual foundations of smart trials and their modes of initiation, before turning to an analysis of litigation processes conducted via digital means. It employs a descriptive-analytical methodology to evaluate the technical feasibility and legal validity of these practices. It specifically focuses on Ministerial Decision No. 260 of 2019, assessing its framework for remote civil litigation and the extent to which it integrates electronic communication and procedural digitisation.

Results and Conclusions: The study evaluates the scope and effectiveness of the ministerial decision in regulating digital litigation, including lawsuit registration, procedural steps, judicial deliberations, issuance of judgments, and temporary orders. It identifies several gaps in the UAE’s digital litigation system, particularly the lack of a comprehensive legislative framework and uniform digital procedures. The research concludes by recommending the enactment of dedicated legislation to standardise and regulate digital judicial proceedings. These recommendations include creating a secure digital system for litigation, clarifying procedural rules for third-party intervention, expanding digital appeal provisions, and defining the competent authority for system-wide implementation in exceptional circumstances.

About Authors

 

Adel Salem Allouzi*

PhD, Faculty of Law, Abu Dhabi University, United Arab Emirates

adel.allouzi@adu.ac.ae

 

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2535-8637

Corresponding author, responsible for writing, reviewing and editing of this article.

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. 

Disclaimer: The author declares that his opinion and views expressed in this manuscript are free of any impact of any organizations.


Copyright: © 2025 Adel Salem Allouzi. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

References

 

1.     Abdulqader RA and Naama AH, ‘The Extent to Which Digital Litigation Achieves Legal Protection for the Rights of Litigants’ (2024) 7 Journal Port Science Research 505, doi:10.36371/port.2024.special.40.

2.     Al Kattan MS, ‘Digital Justice “Model of The United Arab Emirates”’ (2024) 18(1) Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental e04945, doi:10.24857/rgsa.v18n1-091. 

3.     Al Marzooqi AM, ‘Electronic Litigation (Smart Litigation), and Electronic Litigation (Smart Judiciary): A Comparative Study of UAE Legislation with Certain Arab and Foreign Systems’ (2021) 18(2) Sharjah University of Legal Sciences Journal 244, doi:10.36394/jls.v18.i2.7.

4.     Al-Aboudi A, ‘Judicial Report on the Power of Electronic Communications and its Role in the Determination of Civil Proceedings’ [1997] Al-Rafidain Journal of Rights.

5.     Al‐Enizi ZK and Ghandour A, ‘Introducing Smart e‐Trials into the UAE Judicial System’ (2021) 37(1-2) Arab Law Quarterly 194, doi:10.1163/15730255-BJA10045.

6.     Al-Gethami EM, ‘Remotely Litigation about a Practical Jurisprudential Study on the Saudi System’ (2021) 84 Journal of Shari ‘a Sciences and Islamic Studies 964.

7.     Al-Karawi NJM, Remotely Litigation: A Comparative Study (Al-Halabi Human Rights Publications 2017). 

8.     Allouzi AS, ‘Digital Justice and Its Impact on the Functioning of Procedural Rivalry in UAE Law’ (2024) 5(4) Research Journal in Advanced Humanities 300, doi:10.58256/4f8zyx55.

9.     Al-Obeidi OL, ‘Electronic Litigation and its Implementation Mechanism: A Comparative Study’ (2017) 1 University of Tikrit Law Journal 4.

10. Al-Sarhan BAF, Explanation of the UAE Civil Procedure Code under Federal Decree-Law No 42 of 2022(Al-Hafiz Publishing 2024).

11. Al-Shamsi MM, ‘System of Remote Litigation in Accordance with the UAE Civil Procedure Law’ (Master's thesis, UAE University 2022).

12. Al-Sharaa HM, Electronic Litigation and Courts (Dar Al Thaqafa for Publishing and Distribution 2010).

13. Al-Tarsaawi MI, Judicial Proceedings in Electronic Courts (Dar Al Nahda Al Arabiya for Publishing and Distribution 2013).

14. Al-Tersawi ME, Electronic Judiciary between Theory and Practice in the Light of the Experience of Egyptian and UAE Legislator (Dar Al-Nahda Al-Arabiya 2019).

15. Al-Wafa AA, Civil and Commercial Arguments (Dar Al Maaref 1977).

16. Benazza A and Himmi SM, ‘Privacy of Digital Litigation in Commercial Disputes’ (2023) 11(9s) Russian Law Journal 545, doi:10.52783/rlj.v11i9s.1799.

17. Budianto AS, Ika Fransisca and Tedjokusumo DD, ‘Perluasan Dari Alat Bukti Tertulis Dalam Perspektif Hukum Acara Perdata’ (2024) 7(2) Law, Development and Justice Review 124,doi:10.14710/ldjr.7.2024.124-140.

18. Cabral A, ‘Designing Procedure by Contract: Litigation Agreements in Contemporary Civil Procedure’ (2019) 9(2) International Journal of Procedural Law 363, doi:10.1163/30504856-00902009.

19. Clark J, Evaluation of Remote Hearings During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Research Report (HMCTS 2021).

20. Demendecki T, ‘De-Formalization and Electronicization of Civil Proceedings and Procedural Guarantees of Its Subjects’ (2024) 59(5) Journal of Modern Science 21, doi:10.13166/jms/194481.

21. Donoghue J, ‘The Rise of Digital Justice: Courtroom Technology, Public Participation and Access to Justice’ (2017) 80(6) Modern Law Review 995, doi:10.1111/1468-2230.12300.

22. Etherton T, 'Rule-Making for a Digital Court Process: The Civil Procedure Rules—20th Anniversary Conference, 2019' in Higgins A (ed), The Civil Procedure Rules at 20 (OUP 2020) 57, doi:10.1093/oso/9780198863182.003.0003.

23. Fahmy WR, Principals of Civil Justice (Dar Al Fikr Al Arabi 1986).

24. Fernando ZJ and Anditya AW, ‘AI on the Bench: The Future of Judicial Systems in the Age of Artificial Intelligence’ (2024) 13(3) Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan 523, doi:10.25216/jhp.13.3.2024.523-550.

25. Godshall LE, ‘Direct Filing in Multidistrict Litigation: Limiting Venue Options and Choice of Law for Plaintiffs’ (2021) 29(1) George Mason Law Review 3.

26. Hayti F and Heroual HN, ‘Electronic Litigation System Between Improving the Quality of Judicial Work and the Challenges of Digital Space’ (2021) 7(1) Journal of Comparative Legal Studies 138.

27. Heiba NA, Electronic Signature, Its Definition: The Extent of its Evidential Validity (Dar Al Nahda Al Arabiya2012).

28. Hindi A, Electronic Litigation, Use of Electronic Means in Litigation: A Comparative Study (New University Publishing 2014).

29. Ibrahim KM, Electronic Litigation: The Electronic Case and Its Procedures Before the Courts (Dar Al-Fikr Al-Jamii 2007).

30. Ibrahim KM, Procedures for Remote Litigation in Civil and Criminal Subjects (Al-Fiker University House 2019).

31. Inchausti FG, ‘Electronic Service of Documents National and International Aspects’ in Kengyel M and Nemessányi Z (eds), Electronic Technology and Civil Procedure: New Paths to Justice from Around the World (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice 15, Springer 2012) 137, doi:10.1007/978-94-007-4072-3_8. 

32. Ismail MS, ‘Proof by Electronic Means’, Specialized Legal Encyclopedia, vol 1 (2009) <https://arab-ency.com.sy/law/details/163257> accessed 8 June 2025.

33. Khalil A, Civil Procedures (Beirut Al-Halabi Legal Publications 2001). 

34. Larqatt F and Hwam A, ‘Electronic Litigation’ (2021) 6(4) Research in Contracts and Business Law 183.

35. Mancuso C, ‘Remote Justice and Civil Proceedings: The New Principle of Orality in the Post-Pandemic Era’ (2024) 14(2) International Journal of Procedural Law 298, doi:10.1163/30504856-14020004.

36. Mohammed AS, ‘Electronic Litigation and its Challenges’ (Digital Media Effects on Society Security Under Domestic and International Laws: The Proceedings of the 2nd International Scientific Conference, Sulaimani Polytechnic University and Knowledge University, 27-28 April 2024) 398, doi:10.24017/dmedialaw24.17.

37. Muslim A, Principles of Litigation: Judicial Organization, Procedures, and Rulings in Civil, Commercial, and Personal Matters (Dar Al-Fikr Al-Arabi 1977).

38. Nasima T, ‘Electronic Litigation Mechanism in the Digital Environment’ (2019) 5(2) Journal of Legal Studies 121.

39. Qasthary A, Al Muttaqien and Saputra TY, ‘Legalitas Penggunaan Bukti Elektronik Dalam Hukum Acara Perdata’ (2023) 6(1) Jurnal Sosial Humaniora Sigli 276, doi:10.47647/jsh.v6i1.1613.

40. Shabalin A and others, ‘Use of Digital Technologies in Judicial Proceedings in Some Countries of Europe and the USA’ (2024) 9(1) PETITA 1, doi:10.22373/petita.v9i1.224.

41. Sorabji J, A Model Civil Procedure Code for England and Wales (OUP 2024) pt 10, 211, doi:10.1093/oso/9780192848680.003.0011.

42. Sulaiman DH, The Legal Framework for Civil Litigation via the Internet: A Comparative Analytical Study(Dar Al Thaqafa for Publishing and Distribution 2015).

43. Suleiman MM, Electronic Arbitration: E-commerce, Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration Process, Arbitration Award (New University House 2011).

44. Turroni D, ‘Oral Hearing Management Under the ESCP Regulation’ (2021) 11(2) International Journal of Procedural Law 273, doi:10.1163/30504856-01102005. 

45. Velde V, Parvez FA and Chaitanya J, ‘A Blockchain Enabled System for Security, Non-Repudiation and Integrity of Judiciary Proceedings’ (2022 First International Conference on Electrical, Electronics, Information and Communication Technologies (ICEEICT) 16-18 February 2022) doi:10.1109/ICEEICT53079.2022.9768427.

46. Yusuf AF, Electronic Courts and Electronic Litigation (Modern Arab Office 2014).

Reviews for article

Add a Review

Reviews are moderated and will be published after verification!
All comments not related to reviews of the article will be deleted!

 

АНОТАЦІЯ УКРАЇНСЬКОЮ МОВОЮ

 

Дослідницька стаття

 

ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНІ ПРАВИЛА ДЛЯ СМАРТСУДОЧИНСТВА В ОАЕ: ПРАГНЕННЯ ТА РЕАЛЬНІСТЬ

 

Адель Салем Аллузі

 

АНОТАЦІЯ

Вступ. Це дослідження аналізує процесуальні норми, що регулюють «розумне» (електронне) судочинство в ОАЕ, з акцентом на їх поточне впровадження та потенційний майбутній розвиток. Воно досліджує правову та технічну основу електронного судочинства та оцінює сумісність системи ОАЕ з цілями процесуальної ефективності та доступу до правосуддя.

Методи. У цьому дослідженні, яке складається з двох розділів, спочатку розглядаються концептуальні засади електронного судочинства та способи їх ініціювання, а потім здійснюється аналіз судових процесів, що проводяться за допомогою цифрових засобів. У роботі також було використано описово-аналітичну методологію для оцінки технічної доцільності та юридичної обґрунтованості цих практик. Особлива увага приділяється Міністерському рішенню № 260 від 2019 року та оцінюється система для дистанційного цивільного судочинства, ступінь інтеграції електронного зв'язку та процесуальну цифровізацію.

Результати та висновки. У дослідженні оцінюється обсяг та ефективність міністерського рішення щодо регулювання електронного судочинства, включно з реєстрацією позовів, процесуальними рішеннями, судовимиобговореннями, винесенням рішень та тимчасовими заходами. У статті було виявлено кілька прогалин у системі електронногго судочинства ОАЕ, зокрема відсутність комплексної законодавчої бази та уніфікованих цифрових процедур. Дослідження завершується рекомендацією щодо прийняття спеціального законодавства для стандартизації та регулювання цифрових судових проваджень. Ці рекомендації передбачають створення безпечної цифрової системи для судового процесу, уточнення процесуальних норм для вступу третіх осіб, розширення положень про цифрове оскарження, а також визначення уповноваженого органу, відповідального за системне впровадження в умовах надзвичайних ситуацій.

Ключові слова: цифрове правосуддя, електронне судочинсвто, судовий спір, судова влада, цивільне процесуальне право.

Keywords

  • digital justice, electronic litigation, judicial dispute, judiciary, civil procedure law

Publication history

  •  

    Date of submission: 17 May 2025

    Date of acceptance: 16 Jun 2025

    Online First publication: 18 Jul 2025

    Last Publication: 17 Aug 2025

    Whether the manuscript was fast tracked? - Yes

    Number of reviewer report submitted in first round: 2 reports

    Number of revision rounds: 1 round with major revisions
     

    Technical tools were used in the editorial process:

    Plagiarism checks - Turnitin from iThenticate https://www.turnitin.com/products/ithenticate/

    Scholastica for Peer Review https://scholasticahq.com/law-reviews

How to cite it?


  • Allouzi AS, ‘Procedural Rules for Smart Trials in the UAE: Aspirations and Reality’ (2025) 8(3)

    Access to Justice in Eastern Europe 591-618 <https://doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-8.3-a000113>

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-8.3-a000113

    Managing editor – Mag. Bohdana Zahrebelna. Section Editor – Dr. Oksana Uhrynovska.

    English Editor – Julie Bold. Ukrainian language editor – Lilia Hartman.