Civil Law and UAE: Simple Interim Relief Overview

1. Meaning of Interim Relief

Interim relief means a temporary court order made to protect a party's rights or preserve the subject matter of a dispute before the final judgment or final arbitral award.

In simple language:

Interim relief protects the position of the parties until the court can finally decide the dispute.

It does not normally decide the entire case.

Simple example

A company claims that another party is about to sell valuable assets to avoid paying a future judgment.

The claimant may ask the court for a:

Freezing Order

preventing the defendant from disposing of those assets until the dispute is resolved.

2. Purpose of Interim Relief

The main purposes are to:

preserve assets;

prevent destruction of evidence;

prevent continuing harm;

protect property;

preserve the status quo;

prevent dissipation of assets;

protect arbitration proceedings;

prevent proceedings in an inappropriate forum;

obtain urgent disclosure;

preserve the effectiveness of a future judgment or award.

The basic idea is:

A final judgment is useful only if the subject matter of the dispute or recoverable assets can still be protected.

3. Interim Relief vs Final Relief

4. Main Types of Interim Relief

Important forms include:

1. Interim injunction

Orders a party to:

stop doing something; or

sometimes take a specified step.

2. Freezing order

Prevents a person from disposing of or dealing with assets.

3. Worldwide freezing order

May restrict dealing with assets located both inside and outside the jurisdiction, subject to the court's jurisdiction and the terms of the order.

DIFC Court rules contain model freezing-order provisions covering both DIFC assets and, in appropriate cases, worldwide assets.

4. Proprietary injunction

Protects particular property claimed to belong to the claimant.

5. Disclosure order

Requires information to be provided, for example:

location of assets;

bank accounts;

transactions;

documents.

6. Anti-suit injunction

Restricts a party from pursuing proceedings in another court where the legal requirements for such relief are satisfied.

7. Search order

In appropriate cases, permits preservation or inspection of evidence.

8. Interim measures in support of arbitration

A court may provide urgent protection connected with arbitration.

5. Interim Injunction

An interim injunction is a temporary order controlling conduct.

Example

Company A says Company B is unlawfully operating in a restricted part of a building.

Company A asks the court to order:

"Do not enter or operate in that area until the trial."

If granted, this protects the claimant while the substantive dispute continues.

6. Prohibitory and Mandatory Injunctions

Prohibitory injunction

Tells someone:

Do not do X.

Example:

do not sell property;

do not disclose confidential information;

do not enter premises.

Mandatory injunction

Requires someone:

Do X.

Example:

remove an obstruction;

vacate premises;

take a specified corrective step.

The distinction can be important because mandatory relief may have more significant practical consequences.

7. Test for Interim Injunctions

DIFC Courts have applied the familiar American Cyanamid approach to interim injunctions.

The applicant generally needs to establish a serious issue to be tried.

The court then considers matters including:

adequacy of damages;

balance of convenience;

preservation of the status quo;

overall justice of granting or refusing the order.

The court does not normally conduct the full trial at the interim stage.

The DIFC Courts recently reaffirmed this approach in Golden Sands Hotel v Brighton Rock Restaurant.

8. Serious Issue to Be Tried

This does not mean that the claimant must prove the entire case finally.

The claimant generally needs to show that the claim is:

genuine;

legally arguable;

not frivolous or vexatious.

Simple example

If a claimant produces a signed contract, correspondence showing breach, and evidence of continuing harm, there may be a serious issue to be tried.

But merely saying:

"I believe I will win"

is not enough.

9. Adequacy of Damages

The court may ask:

Would money compensation after trial adequately solve the problem?

If yes, an injunction may be unnecessary.

If no, interim protection may be appropriate.

Example

If confidential information is about to be publicly disclosed, later payment of money may not adequately repair the damage.

An injunction may therefore be important.

10. Balance of Convenience

The court may compare the consequences of:

granting the order

against

refusing the order.

Example:

If refusing the order would allow a disputed property to be destroyed, while granting the order merely preserves the property until trial, the preservation of the property may be significant.

This is not the same as deciding who will ultimately win the case.

11. Status Quo

Interim relief often attempts to preserve the existing position until the court can determine the dispute.

Example

Two companies dispute control of a business.

If one party changes the ownership structure before trial, reversing that change may become difficult.

The court may consider interim relief to preserve the position.

12. Freezing Order

A freezing order is one of the most important forms of interim relief.

It prevents a respondent from:

disposing of assets;

transferring assets;

hiding assets;

diminishing asset value;

dealing with assets contrary to the order.

DIFC's model freezing order expressly contains provisions restricting dealings with assets up to a specified value.

13. Purpose of a Freezing Order

A freezing order is generally designed to prevent dissipation of assets.

It does not normally give the claimant ownership of the defendant's assets.

Instead:

The defendant remains the owner, but the court restricts dealings with the assets.

14. Worldwide Freezing Order

A worldwide freezing order can extend to assets outside the jurisdiction, subject to the court's jurisdiction and the order's terms.

DIFC Court orders demonstrate that worldwide freezing orders can be combined with:

asset restrictions;

disclosure obligations;

penal notices.

For example, in Neville v Nigel, the DIFC Court granted a worldwide freezing order together with asset-disclosure relief on an urgent without-notice application.

15. Risk of Dissipation

For a freezing order, the court may consider whether there is a real risk that assets will be dissipated or dealt with improperly.

Example

A defendant:

transfers assets to related companies;

closes bank accounts;

sells property rapidly;

moves funds between jurisdictions;

attempts to conceal ownership.

These facts may be relevant to the risk assessment.

A mere possibility that someone might use their assets in ordinary business is not automatically the same thing as unjustified dissipation.

16. Full and Frank Disclosure

This is one of the most important principles in without-notice applications.

If a claimant asks for an order without giving the defendant an opportunity to appear, the claimant has a serious duty to tell the court about material facts, including matters that may assist the defendant.

Why?

Because:

The defendant is not present to correct the claimant's presentation.

Therefore, the claimant must present the application fairly.

17. Consequence of Non-Disclosure

If material non-disclosure is established, the court may:

discharge the injunction;

vary the order;

impose costs consequences;

require corrective disclosure;

in appropriate circumstances, continue protection in modified form.

DIFC authorities emphasise that material non-disclosure can have serious consequences because interim relief obtained without notice depends upon the integrity of the applicant's presentation.

18. Undertaking in Damages

An applicant seeking an injunction will commonly be required to give a:

cross-undertaking in damages.

This means that the applicant undertakes to compensate the respondent if the interim order later proves to have caused loss for which compensation is appropriate.

The DIFC Court's current interim-injunction practice expressly uses such undertakings.

Simple idea

Applicant gets temporary protection → Applicant accepts responsibility for certain losses caused by an unjustified order.

19. Return Date

An interim order granted urgently or without notice is generally followed by another hearing.

This is often called the:

return date.

At that stage the respondent can:

oppose the order;

ask for variation;

ask for discharge;

present evidence;

challenge jurisdiction;

challenge the applicant's disclosure.

DIFC freezing-order forms expressly contemplate a later return hearing and the respondent's right to apply to vary or discharge the order.

20. Case Law 1 – Neville v Nigel [2024] DIFC

Facts

The claimant sought urgent interim measures without notice.

The DIFC Court granted:

a worldwide freezing order; and

orders requiring disclosure of information concerning the defendant's assets.

The defendant later sought to challenge the orders.

Principle

The case illustrates:

urgent interim protection;

without-notice applications;

worldwide freezing orders;

asset disclosure;

jurisdictional challenges;

full and frank disclosure.

The first-instance order continued the freezing relief after an inter partes hearing.

Importance

It shows that interim relief can operate before the substantive dispute is finally determined.

21. Case Law 2 – William Allan Jones & Others v Robert Anthony Jones [2022] DIFC CFI 043

Facts

The claimants applied for:

an interim injunction; and

a freezing order.

The DIFC Court made a worldwide freezing order without notice.

The order restricted the respondent from dealing with or diminishing the value of specified assets.

Principle

The order demonstrates the practical operation of a freezing injunction and the importance of:

asset preservation;

urgent protection;

undertakings;

return hearings;

penal notices.

Importance

This is an easy case to remember for:

Freezing order = preserve assets until the dispute can be properly resolved.

22. Case Law 3 – Techteryx Ltd v Aria Commodities DMCC & Others [2025] DIFC DEC 001

Facts

The dispute concerned alleged dealings with very substantial funds connected with digital assets and stablecoin-related transactions.

The DIFC Digital Economy Court granted substantial interim protection.

The orders included:

a proprietary injunction;

a worldwide freezing injunction;

ancillary disclosure obligations.

The freezing protection concerned assets up to USD 456 million.

Principle

Interim relief is capable of protecting assets in highly complex:

digital-asset;

cryptocurrency;

fintech;

cross-border;

fraud-related

disputes.

Importance

The case demonstrates that interim relief is not limited to traditional property disputes.

23. Case Law 4 – Golden Sands Hotel v Brighton Rock Restaurant [2026] DIFC CFI 106

Facts

The claimant operated a hotel and sought an interim injunction preventing the defendant restaurant operator from accessing or operating in a specified part of the hotel pending trial.

Decision

The DIFC Court granted the interim injunction.

The Court considered the substance of the proposed order and determined that it was prohibitory rather than mandatory, because it restricted future conduct rather than requiring positive steps such as removal or relocation.

Principle

The court looks at the substance and practical effect of an injunction rather than simply its label.

Importance

Useful for understanding:

Prohibitory injunction vs mandatory injunction.

24. Case Law 5 – Larmag Holding BV v Aljaberi & Others [2019] DIFC CFI 054

Facts

The claimant sought a freezing order after judgment.

The DIFC Court considered whether it had jurisdiction to grant a post-judgment freezing order.

Principle

The court recognised its jurisdiction to make a post-judgment freezing order under the DIFC Court Law.

The case illustrates that freezing protection can sometimes remain relevant even after judgment where there is a need to protect enforcement.

Importance

It demonstrates:

Interim-style protective measures can support the enforcement stage, not merely the trial stage.

25. Case Law 6 – Lateef & Lukman v Liela & Liyani [2020/2021] DIFC Arbitration Proceedings

Facts

The proceedings concerned the DIFC Court's power to grant freezing relief in connection with actual or prospective foreign proceedings.

Principle

The DIFC Court concluded that its injunctive jurisdiction was sufficiently broad to support enforcement of judgments, including:

domestic judgments;

foreign judgments;

prospective judgments.

The court stated that the power was not necessarily dependent upon having a substantive cause of action against the defendant in the DIFC or having assets physically located in the DIFC.

Importance

This is important for:

cross-border litigation;

enforcement;

foreign judgments;

asset protection.

26. Case Law 7 – Globe Investment Holdings Ltd v Commercial Bank of Dubai & Others [2023] DIFC CFI 028

Facts

The case involved challenges concerning freezing relief and alleged failures of full and frank disclosure.

Principle

The DIFC Court discussed important principles governing disclosure in without-notice applications.

It emphasised that:

alleged failures must be clearly identified;

the dispute should not become a mini-trial;

material non-disclosure can justify serious consequences;

the court examines whether the omission materially affected the presentation.

Importance

Remember:

Without-notice relief requires exceptionally careful and fair disclosure.

27. Case Law 8 – Trafigura Pte Ltd v Gupta [2025] DIFC CA 001

Facts

The proceedings involved substantial international commercial litigation and worldwide freezing relief obtained in related English proceedings.

The DIFC Court of Appeal considered issues concerning:

worldwide freezing orders;

proprietary injunctions;

jurisdiction;

asset protection;

enforcement-related relief.

Importance

The case demonstrates the importance of coordinating interim relief across jurisdictions.

A claimant may need protection in more than one country where assets are spread internationally.

28. Case Law 9 – Narciso v Nash [2024] DIFC

Facts

The dispute involved an application for an anti-suit injunction concerning arbitration proceedings.

Principle

The court explained that at the interim stage it does not finally determine the substantive dispute.

Applying the American Cyanamid approach, the court considered whether there were serious issues to be tried and then considered the balance of convenience.

The court also emphasised caution in interfering with proceedings before another competent court, particularly where an anti-suit injunction is sought.

Importance

This case is useful for:

anti-suit injunctions;

arbitration;

foreign proceedings;

serious issue to be tried;

balance of convenience.

29. Case Law 10 – Oran/Oaken v Oved [2025] DIFC CA 004

Principle

The DIFC Court of Appeal explained an important distinction:

The power to grant interim injunctive relief is not itself a source of jurisdiction.

In other words, a court must first have a proper jurisdictional basis before using its injunctive powers.

The case also discussed the relationship between:

freezing orders;

enforcement jurisdiction;

foreign judgments;

arbitration agreements;

anti-suit injunctions.

Importance

This gives an important exam principle:

POWER TO GRANT RELIEF ≠ JURISDICTION TO HEAR THE MATTER.

30. Interim Relief in Arbitration

Interim measures are particularly important in arbitration.

Examples:

preserve assets;

preserve evidence;

prevent disposal of property;

protect confidential information;

prevent interference with arbitration;

maintain the status quo.

The DIFC Courts can grant interim measures in support of arbitration where the statutory jurisdictional requirements are satisfied.

Recent DIFC arbitration orders demonstrate the use of urgent anti-suit and freezing relief in support of arbitration proceedings.

31. Anti-Suit Injunction

An anti-suit injunction attempts to prevent a party from pursuing proceedings in another forum.

Example

Contract says:

"All disputes must be resolved through DIFC-seated arbitration."

One party starts proceedings in another court.

The other party may seek an anti-suit injunction where the legal requirements are satisfied.

But courts exercise such powers carefully because they concern proceedings before another court.

The DIFC decision in Narciso v Nash illustrates this caution.

32. Proprietary Injunction

A proprietary injunction is different from an ordinary freezing order.

Freezing order

Protects assets against dissipation.

Proprietary injunction

Protects specific property that the claimant says belongs to it.

Example

Company A alleges:

"These particular funds belong to us."

The court may consider proprietary relief to preserve those specific funds.

33. Asset Disclosure Order

A disclosure order can require the respondent to provide information about:

bank accounts;

assets;

transfers;

beneficial ownership;

location of property;

recipients of funds.

In Techteryx, the DIFC Court included ancillary disclosure obligations alongside proprietary and freezing relief.

34. Interim Relief and Evidence

Interim relief may also protect evidence.

Example:

A company alleges that an employee is about to delete:

emails;

accounting records;

customer databases;

confidential documents.

The court may consider appropriate protective relief where the procedural and substantive requirements are satisfied.

The objective is:

Preserve evidence so that the final dispute can be fairly decided.

35. Interim Relief and Fraud

Fraud disputes often create strong interim-relief issues because there may be a risk of:

asset transfers;

concealment;

dissipation;

destruction of records;

movement of money across borders.

Possible measures include:

freezing orders;

proprietary injunctions;

disclosure;

search/preservation orders.

But allegations of fraud must not simply be treated as proven facts because an interim order has been obtained.

36. Interim Relief and Digital Assets

Digital assets create special challenges because they can be:

transferred rapidly;

moved across jurisdictions;

held through wallets;

controlled through private keys;

transferred through exchanges.

The Techteryx proceedings demonstrate the use of proprietary and worldwide freezing relief in a dispute involving very substantial digital-asset-related funds.

Therefore:

Interim relief is particularly important where assets can move faster than ordinary litigation.

37. Interim Relief and Construction Disputes

Construction disputes can also require urgent protection.

Examples:

preventing destruction of defective work;

preserving access to a site;

protecting equipment;

maintaining the status quo;

preserving evidence for expert inspection;

preventing unlawful termination consequences.

Example

A contractor wants to remove disputed work before an expert can inspect it.

The other party may seek interim relief to preserve the work until inspection.

38. Interim Relief and Property Disputes

Possible examples include:

preventing sale of disputed property;

preserving possession;

preventing alteration of premises;

preventing interference with access;

preserving disputed documents.

The court must consider the applicable property law, contractual rights and jurisdiction.

39. Without-Notice Applications

An interim order can sometimes be sought without notice where giving advance notice could defeat the purpose of the order.

Example

If a claimant warns a defendant:

"Tomorrow I will ask the court to freeze your assets."

the defendant might immediately transfer the assets.

In such a situation, an urgent without-notice application may be considered.

But this is exceptional and comes with a heavy duty of full and frank disclosure.

The DIFC rules expressly contemplate without-notice freezing orders and subsequent rights to apply for variation or discharge.

40. Interim Relief Does Not Mean Final Victory

This is an important examination point.

A court granting interim relief does not necessarily mean that the claimant has won the case.

The court may simply conclude:

"There is sufficient reason to preserve the position until the dispute can be finally decided."

Therefore:

Interim order ≠ final judgment.

41. Main Grounds for Refusing Interim Relief

A court may refuse relief where:

there is no serious issue to be tried;

damages are an adequate remedy;

there is no sufficient risk requiring protection;

the balance of convenience favours refusal;

the applicant failed to make proper disclosure;

the applicant lacks jurisdictional basis;

the proposed order is too broad;

the applicant's undertaking is inadequate;

the applicant has delayed improperly;

the relief would interfere unjustifiably with another competent court.

42. Interim Relief Checklist

Before granting relief, a court may examine:

Step 1 – Jurisdiction

Does the court have power to act?

Step 2 – Legal claim

Is there a genuine underlying claim?

Step 3 – Urgency/risk

Is immediate protection required?

Step 4 – Serious issue

Is there a serious issue to be tried?

Step 5 – Damages

Would damages be an adequate remedy?

Step 6 – Balance

Which course better protects justice pending trial?

Step 7 – Disclosure

For without-notice relief:

Has the applicant fairly disclosed material facts?

Step 8 – Undertaking

Can the applicant provide the required undertaking in damages?

Step 9 – Scope

Is the order proportionate and appropriately drafted?

Step 10 – Return date

When can the respondent challenge or vary the order?

43. Mainland UAE and DIFC Must Be Distinguished

This is particularly important.

Mainland UAE

Mainland UAE courts apply UAE federal and applicable local procedural legislation.

Interim measures may include forms of:

precautionary attachment;

urgent judicial orders;

preservation measures;

other provisional remedies.

The exact requirements depend on the applicable procedural law and type of relief.

DIFC

DIFC has its own:

Rules of the DIFC Courts;

Court Law;

Arbitration Law;

procedural framework.

Its rules expressly contain detailed provisions concerning interim remedies and freezing orders.

ADGM

ADGM also has its own court and procedural framework. Its legislation gives the ADGM Court power to grant injunctions where it is just and convenient, and its procedural directions specifically address freezing injunction applications.

Therefore:

"UAE interim relief" is not a single uniform procedural concept. The forum matters.

44. Important Difference: Interim Attachment vs Freezing Order

These should not automatically be treated as identical.

Precautionary attachment

Generally focuses on securing identified assets for a claim or enforcement.

Freezing order

Generally restricts dealing with assets to prevent dissipation.

The terminology, statutory requirements and procedural consequences depend upon the jurisdiction.

45. Simple Practical Examples

Example 1 – Asset Dissipation

A owes B AED 10 million.

A begins transferring assets to related companies.

B seeks a freezing order.

Purpose: prevent dissipation until the claim is resolved.

Example 2 – Confidential Information

A former employee threatens to disclose confidential customer information.

The employer seeks an interim injunction.

Purpose: prevent disclosure before trial.

Example 3 – Construction Evidence

A contractor allegedly performed defective waterproofing.

The contractor plans to remove the work.

The employer seeks interim relief allowing preservation/inspection.

Purpose: protect evidence.

Example 4 – Arbitration

A contract contains a DIFC-seated arbitration agreement.

One party begins court proceedings elsewhere.

The other party may seek an anti-suit injunction if the jurisdictional and substantive requirements are satisfied.

Example 5 – Digital Assets

A claimant alleges that millions of dollars of digital-asset-related funds are being transferred.

A freezing/proprietary injunction and disclosure orders may be sought.

The Techteryx proceedings illustrate this type of modern interim protection.

46. Eight Key Cases for Exam Revision

47. Easy Memory Formula

Remember:

J – Jurisdiction

S – Serious issue

D – Damages

B – Balance of convenience

D – Disclosure

U – Undertaking

S – Scope

So:

J + S + D + B + D + U + S = Interim Relief Analysis

For a freezing order, remember:

CLAIM + ASSET + RISK OF DISSIPATION + JURISDICTION + DISCLOSURE + UNDERTAKING

48. Exam Definition

Interim relief is temporary judicial protection granted before final determination of a dispute to preserve assets, property, evidence, rights or the effectiveness of a future judgment or arbitral award.

49. Short Exam Answer

If asked "What is interim relief in UAE civil law?", write:

Interim relief is provisional protection granted by a competent UAE court before final determination of a dispute. Its purpose is to preserve the status quo, protect assets or evidence, prevent continuing or irreparable harm, and ensure that a future judgment or arbitral award remains effective. Depending on the applicable jurisdiction, it may include injunctions, precautionary or freezing measures, proprietary relief, disclosure orders and anti-suit relief. The DIFC Courts have developed detailed jurisprudence on interim injunctions and freezing orders, including requirements concerning jurisdiction, serious issues to be tried, balance of convenience, full and frank disclosure and undertakings in damages. Mainland UAE, DIFC and ADGM procedures must, however, be analysed separately.

50. Conclusion

Interim relief is essentially a protective mechanism.

It does not normally answer the final question:

"Who wins?"

Instead, it asks:

"What protection is necessary now so that the final decision is not rendered ineffective?"

The most important forms are:

Interim injunction

Freezing order

Worldwide freezing order

Proprietary injunction

Disclosure order

Anti-suit injunction

Search/preservation relief

Arbitration-related interim measures

The most important principles are:

Jurisdiction → Serious issue → Adequacy of damages → Balance of convenience → Full and frank disclosure → Undertaking in damages → Proportionate order.

Finally, always distinguish mainland UAE, DIFC, and ADGM. DIFC and ADGM decisions are highly useful for understanding modern interim-relief principles, but they are not automatically binding on an onshore UAE court.