Arbitration Language in UAE Proceedings: Arabic Vs English Considerations
The language you choose is not the language the enforcement court will read
What the UAE Arbitration Law leaves to the parties on language, and what the courts mandate regardless: Arabic for anything filed with them. Covers the DIAC and arbitrateAD rules, which documents need certified translation and to what standard, bilingual hearings, the trade-offs between English and Arabic, what a language clause should settle, and when a court will step in over language.
Reviewed by Mohamed Noureldin, Founder, Managing Partner & Senior Legal Consultant
An arbitration clause names English as the language of the proceedings. The hearing runs in English, the tribunal writes its award in English, and the party that wins takes the award to a UAE court to have it enforced. The choice made in the clause then stops being the parties’ own: the UAE courts mandate that any documents submitted to them, including arbitration awards, be in Arabic or translated into Arabic. What the clause said about language decides how much translation is waiting at that point, what it costs, and how much of the award is open to an argument about the accuracy of the text.
That tension runs through arbitration in the UAE. Arabic is the official court language, and English is widely used in commercial transactions and in international arbitration. Language does not only affect how clearly people understand each other. It has implications for procedural efficiency, for cost, and for whether an award can be enforced.
What the arbitration law leaves to the parties
Arbitration in the UAE is governed primarily by Federal Decree-Law No. 6 of 2018 on Arbitration (the “UAE Arbitration Law”), which codifies the principles of arbitration and aligns with international standards. Article 41 gives the parties the power to agree on the language of the proceedings. Where they have not agreed, the arbitral tribunal holds the discretion to determine the language, taking into account the circumstances of the case.
The autonomy the law grants is broad. It is also the reason the language of an international arbitration is better settled in the contract than left to the tribunal. An arbitration agreement without clear language provisions can lead to procedural delays, increased costs, and even risks to the enforceability of awards.
The one point the parties cannot agree away
The UAE courts supervise arbitration and enforce arbitral awards, and they mandate that any documents submitted to them, including arbitration awards, be in Arabic or translated into Arabic. That is part of UAE civil procedure, and it reflects the official status of Arabic as the language of the judiciary. An arbitration conducted entirely in English still ends with an award that must be translated into Arabic for recognition and enforcement by the UAE courts. Failure to comply with the translation requirement can cost the award its effect, because the courts may refuse enforcement on procedural grounds.
So the arbitration law grants broad autonomy over language, while the requirement of Arabic translation for court enforcement remains non-negotiable. A clause drafted as though only the first of those existed leaves the second to be dealt with at the enforcement stage.
What DIAC and arbitrateAD say about language
International arbitration institutions operating in the UAE, such as the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and arbitrateAD in Abu Dhabi, also provide rules governing the language of the arbitration. These rules typically allow parties to select the language, or enable the tribunal to decide in the absence of agreement. The DIAC Arbitration Rules explicitly recognise English and Arabic as working languages, and permit bilingual proceedings where necessary. That lets arbitrators bring in interpreters and translators for hearings and document exchange, so that proceedings stay fair where the parties’ language skills may be unequal.
Which documents need translating, and to what standard
Where the arbitration is conducted in English and enforcement is sought in the UAE courts, all arbitration documents — including pleadings, evidence, tribunal orders and final awards — must be translated into Arabic by certified translators. The requirement also applies to any hearing transcripts or witness statements submitted to the court.
The standard is not a clerical one. Translation is a legal and strategic task that can influence the outcome of the proceedings. An incorrect or imprecise translation can lead to misunderstandings, evidentiary challenges, and even grounds for challenging arbitral awards. The translation must be accurate and faithful to the original text to withstand judicial scrutiny. Courts may appoint experts to verify translation fidelity, and any significant discrepancy can delay enforcement or raise questions about the validity of the award.
Running a hearing in two languages
Arbitration in the UAE often unfolds in a bilingual setting, where documents, hearings and awards may require translation between Arabic and English. Hearings may be conducted with simultaneous interpretation, so that an Arabic-speaking arbitrator and an English-speaking witness can communicate. Document production and submissions may be bilingual as well, with each document accompanied by a certified translation. The method is inclusive, and it also increases the procedural complexity and the cost of the arbitration.
It puts work on the tribunal too. Arbitrators need procedural orders that set clear rules on language use, translation standards and the handling of discrepancies. Where the tribunal does not manage that, a party less proficient in the language of the arbitration can be left at a disadvantage, and the case can pick up delay and cost.
English or Arabic, and what each choice costs
English often emerges as the preferred language for international commercial contracts and arbitration clauses in the UAE. It is the global language of commerce, widely used among multinational corporations, especially in sectors like construction, oil and gas, and finance, where parties come from diverse jurisdictions. An English-language arbitration helps foreign parties, arbitrators and counsel take part, and makes for a more neutral and accessible forum. The cost arrives later: arbitration conducted solely in English triggers translation requirements for enforcement before the UAE courts, which can impose additional time and cost.
Arabic runs the other way. Choosing it may reduce translation burdens when awards are enforced domestically, but it could pose challenges for non-Arabic-speaking parties, and it may advantage local parties or practitioners more familiar with the language. For disputes involving regional entities or government institutions, Arabic is often the natural and legally mandated choice.
Between the two sits the hybrid regime. A contract may specify English as the primary language of the arbitration, with mandatory Arabic translation of key documents and of the award. That keeps the commercial convenience of English while meeting the UAE’s official language requirements. Hybrid regimes must be drafted carefully, to avoid procedural confusion and disputes over which documents require translation and at what stages.
What the clause should settle, and who should hear the case
Provisions specifying the arbitration language, the translation obligations that go with it, and the handling of bilingual materials can reduce uncertainty and give the parties a route for resolving language-related disputes. Clauses that go further — timelines for translations, standards for certified translators, and a mechanism for disputes about language itself — can mitigate procedural risks and reduce the opportunities for tactical use of translation delay. This work belongs with the rest of the contract drafting, before there is a dispute to argue about.
Drafting has to take account of what language does to evidentiary processes, to witness testimony, and to the drafting of the award itself. The same thinking applies to appointments. Parties should consider selecting arbitrators and counsel proficient in the chosen language, to avoid one side being at a disadvantage. The tribunal’s linguistic capabilities bear directly on the efficiency and fairness of the proceedings. Arbitrators who work fluently in both Arabic and English may remove potential linguistic barriers and improve communication.
Where language brings the court back in
The UAE’s commitment to international arbitration shows in its adoption of the New York Convention and its modern arbitration legislation, yet the courts maintain strict procedural requirements on language. Enforcement applications submitted to the UAE courts must be in Arabic or accompanied by certified Arabic translations. The courts scrutinise translation quality closely, and any ambiguity or inconsistency can lead to a refusal of enforcement. That is the argument for qualified legal translators who understand both legal terminology and the context of arbitration.
Language can also pull the courts into the proceedings themselves. Where a party alleges that the tribunal failed to provide necessary translations, or that language barriers compromised its right to be heard, the courts may order remedial measures or even annul awards on limited grounds. Parties must anticipate the need to spend on translation and interpretation to comply with what the courts require. Not doing so may result in delays, increased costs, or a denial of enforcement, which could undermine the value of the arbitration as a neutral dispute resolution mechanism.
Nour Attorneys provides international arbitration services, and acts in commercial litigation.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
