UAE Arbitration Witness Statements: Drafting and Hearings

Witness Statements in UAE Arbitration: Preparation and Presentation

Witness statements carry much of the factual and expert evidence in UAE arbitration, and a tribunal often forms its first view of a commercial dispute from them before a single witness speaks. A statement that is clear, specific and tied to documents gives the tribunal something it can rely on. One that is vague, overwritten or inconsistent with the record invites doubt about the whole case.

Preparing witness statements in the UAE means working to the procedural rules of the arbitration institution and to local legal principles at the same time. Arbitration gives parties more control over how factual and expert evidence is assembled than court proceedings usually allow. That control is an advantage only if it is used with discipline.

This article sets out how witness evidence works in UAE arbitration: the legal and institutional requirements a statement must meet, the difference between factual and expert witnesses, how each type of statement should be drafted, and what happens when the witness is examined at the hearing.

It also covers the factor that decides how much weight a statement carries, which is credibility. Tribunals in the UAE pay close attention to how a witness gives evidence, not only to what the statement says. Preparing for cross-examination is therefore part of preparing the statement itself, not a separate job left to the week before the hearing.

The legal framework for witness evidence in UAE arbitration

Arbitration in the UAE is governed principally by Federal Law No. 6 of 2018 on Arbitration, which follows the UNCITRAL Model Law closely. The law sets the procedural foundation for arbitral proceedings, including how evidence is submitted and assessed. Witness statements are not always defined in detail by statute, but they are the documentary evidence tribunals use to establish facts and to receive expert opinion.

The form a statement takes depends heavily on the institutional rules that apply. Arbitrations administered by the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) or by arbitrateAD in Abu Dhabi are usually subject to formal requirements: a declaration that the contents are true, an account of the witness’s relationship to the parties, and limits on the scope of what the witness may address. Compared with a court affidavit, an arbitration witness statement allows more latitude in format, but the evidence in it must still hold up when tested.

The clearest distinction to draw is between factual and expert witnesses. A factual witness gives a firsthand account of events, transactions or conduct relevant to the dispute, and the statement should stay within what that person saw, did or received. An expert witness is instructed to give a technical, financial or scientific assessment, and the statement takes the form of a report setting out instructions, method, findings and conclusions.

Practical requirements matter as much as content. Statements have to be filed within the timetable the tribunal sets and in the format the rules require, with exhibits and referenced documents attached. Evidence standards in arbitration are more flexible than in court, which makes it tempting to file everything; the better approach is to file what the tribunal needs and to make the link between each statement and each document explicit.

Parties should also keep enforcement in mind. Where an award is later challenged, or an annulment application is made before the local courts, the UAE Civil Procedures Law and the rules on evidence become relevant. A statement that separates fact from opinion and identifies its sources clearly is far easier to defend at that stage than one that blends the two.

Drafting factual and expert witness statements

Preparation begins with choosing witnesses, not with drafting. The question is not who is most senior or most willing, but who has direct knowledge of the facts in issue and can explain that knowledge under questioning.

Factual witnesses

A factual witness statement should read as a chronology. It should identify the witness, explain their role at the relevant time, and then take the tribunal through events in sequence: what was agreed, what was performed, what was said, what went wrong and when. Each significant assertion should point to a document where one exists.

Keep interpretation out. Speculation about another party’s motives, legal argument dressed up as recollection, and secondhand accounts of conversations the witness did not hear all weaken a statement, because opposing counsel will find them and ask the witness to defend material that was never theirs to defend. A short statement confined to what the witness actually knows is stronger than a long one that reaches.

Expert witnesses

Expert evidence needs more groundwork. The instructing party should select an expert whose qualifications and experience match the issue, and whose opinions can withstand questioning by an opposing expert. The report should state the instructions received, the data relied on, the method applied, the assumptions made and the reasoning behind each conclusion, so the tribunal can follow the analysis rather than accept it on authority.

Independence is the point on which expert evidence most often fails. Tribunals in the UAE expect an expert to give an honest opinion within their field, and a report that argues the client’s case rather than answering the technical question loses value quickly. Where the data leaves a range of possible answers, saying so protects the opinion; concealing it does not.

Preparing the witness to be examined

Drafting is only half the work. A witness who has never been questioned before needs to understand what cross-examination is for, how to answer a question that carries a hidden assumption, and why “I do not recall” is an acceptable answer when it is true. Rehearsal should cover the difficult documents and the weakest parts of the account, not only the helpful material.

The line between proper preparation and improper coaching matters. Familiarising a witness with the process, the documents and the issues is legitimate. Telling a witness what to say is not, and a tribunal that suspects it has heard a scripted answer will discount the evidence.

Witness management also means planning for gaps. Where one party has far better access to documents or to technical expertise than the other, that imbalance will be used at the hearing. Corroborating documents, a supplementary expert report, or a second witness to the same event are the practical answers, and each takes time to arrange.

Language deserves attention in UAE proceedings. Where a witness gives evidence through an interpreter, or in a language that is not their first, preparation should cover how the statement was taken, who translated it, and how the witness will handle questions put in another language. Confusion on these points reads as evasion even when it is nothing of the kind.

Presenting witnesses at the hearing and handling cross-examination

The hearing is where written statements are tested. Arbitration allows considerable flexibility in how witness evidence is introduced, and counsel should use that flexibility deliberately rather than follow court habit.

Sequence matters. Calling factual witnesses first to establish what happened, and expert witnesses afterwards to explain what it means, lets the tribunal build the picture in the order the case depends on. If an expert opinion rests on facts the tribunal has not yet heard, the opinion is harder to accept.

On direct examination, where the rules and the tribunal allow it, the aim is to confirm and clarify the written statement rather than repeat it. Open questions that let the witness explain in their own words are more persuasive than leading questions, which invite objection and make the evidence look rehearsed.

Cross-examination in UAE arbitration can be demanding. Opposing counsel will look for contradictions with the documents, differences between the written statement and the oral evidence, gaps in recollection and, with experts, weaknesses in method. Witnesses should be ready to answer precisely, to accept a point that is correct, and to resist agreeing to a proposition simply because it is put with confidence.

Dealing with a known weakness in advance is usually better than waiting for it to be raised. Addressing an unhelpful document or an inconsistent date during direct examination shows the tribunal that nothing is being hidden, and takes much of the force out of the later question. Where a point cannot be answered from the existing evidence, a rebuttal witness or a supplementary report may be the right response.

Tribunals sometimes ask for witness conferencing, or for a joint session in which the party-appointed experts are questioned together on the points that divide them. These sessions reward genuine preparation: an expert who understands both reports, and can say precisely where the disagreement lies and why, helps the tribunal far more than one who recites a written position.

Witness credibility and adverse testimony

What a witness statement is worth usually comes down to whether the tribunal believes the witness. Credibility is assessed on consistency, plausibility, corroboration and the manner in which evidence is given.

Statements that are clear, accurate and supported by documents carry more weight for obvious reasons. Contradictions and overstatement work the other way, and they are found quickly in cross-examination. Cutting a sentence that overstates the position costs nothing at the drafting stage; defending it at the hearing can cost the point.

Adverse testimony has to be planned for, whether it comes from the other side or from a party’s own witness. The usual answers are corroboration, in the form of a document, a contemporaneous record or another witness to the same conversation, or an alternative route to the same conclusion through other evidence. Where a witness’s account has been damaged, the case should not be left resting on it.

Demeanour counts as well. A witness who becomes argumentative, evasive or visibly uncertain damages their own evidence regardless of whether the underlying account is true. Preparation and rehearsal are what allow a witness to stay measured, answer the question asked, and accept the limits of their own knowledge.

UAE tribunals tend to give real weight to how testimony is given and to a witness’s adherence to the declaration of truth in the statement. Witnesses who are professional, careful and candid about what they do not know limit the damage that minor inconsistencies or technical objections can do.

Credibility is managed across the whole arbitration rather than settled at one point. Witness selection, drafting and hearing preparation are connected decisions, and treating them as one exercise produces better evidence than handling them one after another.

Conclusion

Preparing and presenting witness statements in UAE arbitration is methodical work. Statements carry the factual and expert case, and both their content and their delivery have to hold up when tested by opposing counsel. Knowing what the applicable law and the institutional rules require, keeping factual and expert evidence distinct, and preparing witnesses properly for examination are what make written evidence useful at a hearing.

Parties should also be realistic about imbalances in evidence. One side often has better access to documents or to expertise than the other, and that gap has to be met with corroboration and preparation rather than ignored. Procedural and language considerations particular to UAE arbitration make tailored preparation worth the time it takes.

In the end, the credibility of the witnesses and the quality of their statements can decide the outcome. Counsel should treat witness selection, drafting, hearing presentation and cross-examination preparation as a single connected task, aimed at evidence a tribunal can rely on and an award that survives challenge.

For further guidance on arbitration procedure and dispute resolution in the UAE, see our pages on international arbitration, commercial litigation and choosing between arbitration and court proceedings. Our arbitration practice advises on evidence strategy and hearing preparation in arbitrations seated in Dubai and across the UAE.

Related Services: Explore our arbitration case strategy and arbitration evidence and document management services for practical legal support in this area.

Disclaimer

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult with a qualified attorney for specific guidance on your situation.

Related service pages

• Arbitration proceedings in the UAE
• Commercial litigation before the UAE courts
• Corporate and commercial legal advice
• Drafting contracts and arbitration clauses

Speak to our arbitration team

If you are preparing witness evidence for an arbitration in the UAE, contact the Nour Attorneys Team to discuss how your factual and expert statements should be prepared and presented.

More articles on UAE arbitration

Explore more of our insights on related topics:

• Opening statements in UAE arbitration: framing the case for the tribunal
• Counterclaims in UAE arbitration
• Negotiating settlement during a UAE arbitration
• International arbitration in the UAE: the legal framework