Civil Law and UAE – Simple Joint Liability Overview

1. Meaning of Joint Liability

Joint liability, commonly called joint and several liability or solidarity, means that two or more persons can be legally responsible for the same obligation.

In a joint-and-several debt, the creditor may generally demand the whole debt from one debtor, several debtors, or all of them, subject to the applicable law and the nature of each debtor's obligation.

Simple Example

A, B and C jointly owe AED 900,000 to X.

If the obligation is legally joint and several:

X may claim AED 900,000 from A;

X may claim AED 900,000 from B;

X may claim AED 900,000 from C; or

X may proceed against all three.

If A pays the whole amount, A can normally seek contribution from B and C according to their respective shares.

2. Main Rule Under UAE Civil Law

The most important rule is Article 373 of the 2025 Civil Transactions Law.

It provides that joint and several liability:

is not presumed;

must arise from a legal provision or

arise from an agreement.

Therefore, merely having several debtors does not automatically make them jointly and severally liable.

Key principle

Multiple debtors ≠ automatically joint and several debtors.

There must be a legal or contractual basis for solidarity.

3. Joint Liability of Debtors

Articles 380–393 deal principally with joint and several liability among debtors.

Under Article 380, solidarity can exist even where the obligations of the different debtors are not identical in every respect—for example, one debt may be deferred or conditional while another is immediately due.

This makes the concept flexible in commercial and contractual transactions.

4. Creditor's Right to Claim

Under Article 382, the creditor may claim the debt from:

all joint and several debtors; or

one or some of them.

A claim against one debtor does not prevent the creditor from pursuing the others.

Example

A, B and C are jointly and severally liable for AED 1 million.

The creditor can:

sue A for AED 1 million;

sue B for AED 1 million;

sue C for AED 1 million; or

pursue more than one debtor.

The creditor cannot, however, obtain double recovery of the same debt.

5. Payment by One Debtor

Article 381 provides an important rule:

If one joint and several debtor pays the debt, the liability of that debtor and the other joint and several debtors toward the creditor is discharged.

Example

A, B and C owe X AED 300,000 jointly and severally.

A pays X AED 300,000.

The debt owed to X is discharged.

However, A may have a right of contribution or recourse against B and C.

6. Right of Recourse Between Debtors

Article 392 deals with the internal relationship between joint and several debtors.

If A pays the entire debt, A may normally recover the appropriate shares from B and C.

Unless the law or agreement provides otherwise, the debt is divided into equal shares.

Example

A, B and C owe AED 900,000.

A pays the entire AED 900,000.

If there is no different agreement:

A's share = AED 300,000

B's share = AED 300,000

C's share = AED 300,000

A can therefore generally seek AED 300,000 from B and AED 300,000 from C.

7. Insolvent Joint Debtor

Article 392 also deals with a situation where one of the joint debtors is bankrupt or insolvent.

If C cannot contribute his share, the paying debtor and the solvent joint debtors may have to bear the consequences of C's insolvency according to their respective shares, while retaining the right of recourse against C if C later becomes solvent.

This prevents the entire economic burden from automatically falling on only one solvent debtor.

8. Defences Available to a Joint Debtor

Article 382 distinguishes between:

Personal defences

A debtor may raise defences that are specifically applicable to him.

Common defences

A debtor may also raise defences that apply to all the joint debtors.

Defences belonging only to another debtor

A debtor generally cannot rely on a defence that is purely personal to another joint debtor.

Example

If A has a personal defence arising from A's separate circumstances, B normally cannot simply use A's personal defence to defeat the creditor's claim against B.

9. Settlement With One Joint Debtor

Article 389 provides rules concerning settlement.

If the creditor settles with one joint debtor and the settlement releases that debtor from the debt, the other debtors may benefit from that release.

However, if the settlement creates a new or increased obligation for the other debtors, it does not bind them unless they approve it.

Therefore, a creditor generally cannot use a settlement with one debtor to unilaterally increase the obligations of the others.

10. Release of One Joint Debtor

Article 385 regulates release.

A creditor may release one joint debtor:

from the debt; or

from the solidarity itself.

The legal consequences are different.

For example, releasing a debtor from solidarity does not necessarily mean that the underlying debt disappears. The creditor may lose the ability to demand the shares of the other debtors from that released debtor.

This distinction is important in settlement agreements.

11. Acknowledgment of Debt by One Debtor

Under Article 390, an acknowledgment of the debt by one joint debtor does not automatically bind the other joint debtors.

This protects the other debtors from being prejudiced by an independent admission made by one co-debtor.

Example

A, B and C are joint debtors.

A admits that the entire debt exists.

That admission does not automatically operate as an acknowledgment against B and C.

12. Court Judgment Against One Debtor

Article 391 establishes an important rule.

A judgment against one joint and several debtor is not automatically enforceable against the other joint debtors merely because they are jointly liable.

However, the other debtors may benefit from a judgment favourable to the debtor, unless that favourable judgment was based upon a reason personal to that particular debtor.

This preserves the individual procedural rights of each debtor.

13. Joint Liability and Guarantee

Joint liability should not automatically be confused with a normal guarantee.

A guarantor may have subsidiary liability depending on the applicable guarantee rules.

A guarantor may become jointly and severally liable where:

the law provides for it; or

the guarantee agreement establishes such liability.

The exact wording of the guarantee is therefore extremely important.

14. Joint Liability and Tort

Joint responsibility can also arise in situations involving several persons who contribute to the same harmful event.

For example:

Contractor A performs defective work;

Engineer B negligently supervises the work;

the owner suffers damage.

Depending on the applicable statutory rules and facts, more than one person may become responsible for the resulting loss.

The court must still determine:

the wrongful act or breach;

the damage;

causation;

the legal basis of each person's liability; and

whether the law makes the liabilities joint and several.

15. Special Example: Construction Decennial Liability

A particularly important statutory example is decennial liability.

Under the current Civil Transactions Law, Articles 821–824 regulate the liability of contractors and supervising architects/engineers for serious structural defects and collapse.

The 2025 law expressly describes the relevant contractor and engineer liability as joint and several in the circumstances covered by the statute.

This is an important example because solidarity here comes from law, rather than merely from a contractual clause. (Noura Lawyers)

16. Joint Liability vs Several Liability

These concepts should be distinguished.

The UAE Civil Transactions Law expressly states that solidarity is not presumed.

17. Joint Debt Is Different From Joint-and-Several Debt

The current Civil Transactions Law separately regulates a joint debt.

Under Articles 394 onwards, a joint debt may arise where, for example:

the cause of the debt is unified;

the debt passes by inheritance to several heirs;

the relevant property is jointly owned and consumed; or

the debt represents consideration for a loan from jointly owned property.

Each participant generally has a share.

Therefore:

Joint debt ≠ automatically joint-and-several liability.

This distinction is important in examination questions.

18. Indivisible Obligations

The current law also separately deals with indivisible obligations.

Under Article 403, where several debtors are responsible for an obligation that cannot be divided, each may be liable for the entire obligation, while the debtor who performs may have recourse against the others according to their shares.

This can look similar to solidarity from the creditor's perspective, but its legal source and internal consequences are different.

19. Joint and Several Creditors

Joint liability can also operate on the creditor side.

Under Article 374, joint and several creditors may collectively or individually demand the entire debt.

Article 375 provides that what one joint and several creditor receives belongs collectively to the creditors and is distributed according to their shares, normally equally unless law or agreement provides otherwise.

Thus, solidarity may exist:

among debtors, or
among creditors.

20. Important Case Laws

Because the current Civil Transactions Law entered into force only on 1 June 2026, many reported judicial authorities on solidarity were decided under the former 1985 Civil Transactions Law or under DIFC legislation. They remain useful for understanding judicial treatment of joint liability, but their statutory provisions must be checked against the current law.

Case 1 – Haya Spa LLC v Harper Real Estate / Hasan Real Estate

[2016] DIFC SCT 150

The DIFC Small Claims Tribunal considered vicarious liability and joint-and-several liability involving a landlord and its appointed agent.

The court proceeded on the basis that both defendants could be jointly and severally liable where the legal requirements were satisfied.

Principle

Where multiple legally responsible parties contribute to the same actionable liability, joint-and-several liability may allow the claimant to pursue the responsible parties without requiring separate recovery of each person's portion.

(DIFC Courts)

Case 2 – Corinth Pipeworks SA v Afras Ltd & Radhakrishnan Kumar

[2010] DIFC CFI 024

The DIFC Court made an order expressly providing that the defendants' payment obligations were joint and several.

Principle

A court order should clearly identify whether liability is:

joint;

joint and several; or

several.

The distinction is important for enforcement.

(DIFC Courts)

Case 3 – Emerging Markets PE Management Ltd v Port Link GP Ltd & The Port Fund LP

[2018] DIFC CFI 050

The DIFC Court entered judgment for a very substantial admitted amount and held the defendants jointly and severally liable.

Principle

Where joint-and-several liability is established, the creditor can enforce the judgment against the liable defendants on that basis rather than being restricted to separate fractional claims.

(DIFC Courts)

Case 4 – IDBI Bank Ltd v Mabani Delma General Contracting Co LLC & Others

[2019] DIFC CFI 070

The DIFC Court entered judgment against multiple defendants and expressly stated that their obligations were joint and several.

Principle

Where contractual obligations establish joint and several responsibility, the judgment may impose that responsibility collectively on the defendants.

(DIFC Courts)

Case 5 – Khaled Salem Musabeh Humaid Al Mheiri v Mohammad Ezelddine El Araj & John Cameron

[2021] DIFC CFI 057

This case is particularly useful because the court examined whether two defendants were actually joint debtors.

The court concluded that the defendants were not joint debtors merely because their liabilities arose in the same broader transaction. Their liabilities arose under separate indemnity agreements.

Principle

The existence of several persons connected with the same transaction does not automatically establish joint-and-several liability.

The legal source of each person's obligation must be examined.

(DIFC Courts)

Case 6 – EBI SA, France & Others v Lal Mahal DMCC & Others

DIFC CFI 024/2016

The DIFC proceedings considered the question of joint-and-several liability and the distinction between separate liability of individual defendants.

The court's treatment demonstrates that liability must be examined separately for each defendant rather than automatically assuming solidarity merely because several persons are named in the same proceedings.

Principle

A claimant must establish the legal basis for imposing liability on each defendant and cannot simply assume that all defendants are jointly and severally responsible.

(DIFC Courts)

Case 7 – Passport Special Opportunities Fund LP v ARY Communications Ltd & Others

DIFC CFI 039/2016

The relevant contractual provisions expressly stated that the defendants and guarantors would be jointly and severally liable for the specified default amount.

Principle

Contractual language can expressly create joint-and-several liability, provided the underlying agreement is legally effective.

(DIFC Courts)

Case 8 – Gulf Wings FZE v A and K Trading Ltd

[2022] DIFC CFI 004

The court made a costs order against multiple persons on a joint-and-several basis.

Principle

Joint-and-several liability is not limited to the principal debt itself; where legally appropriate, a court may also formulate certain costs obligations on a joint-and-several basis.

(DIFC Courts)

21. Main Principles From the Cases

The cases illustrate several important principles:

Principle 1 – No automatic solidarity

Several defendants do not automatically become joint and several debtors.

Principle 2 – Legal source is essential

Solidarity must come from:

legislation; or

agreement.

Principle 3 – Contract wording matters

A properly drafted agreement can expressly establish joint-and-several liability.

Principle 4 – Separate agreements may mean separate liability

If two persons sign separate agreements, their liabilities may remain independent even if the transaction is connected.

Principle 5 – Payment can discharge the common obligation

When one joint debtor pays the debt, the creditor normally cannot recover the same debt again from the other debtors.

Principle 6 – Contribution remains important

The debtor who pays more than his proper share may generally seek contribution from the other joint debtors.

22. Simple Practical Example

Suppose:

A company borrows AED 1 million.

A, B and C sign an agreement expressly stating that they are jointly and severally liable.

The company defaults.

The creditor may pursue the amount against A, B and C according to the terms of the obligation and applicable law.

Suppose A pays AED 1 million.

The creditor's debt is discharged.

A may then seek contribution from B and C according to their respective shares.

If B is insolvent, the statutory rules concerning contribution and the insolvent debtor's share become relevant.

23. Important Examination Points

For an exam, remember:

Joint liability = responsibility involving more than one person.

Joint and several liability is stronger than ordinary joint liability.

Under current UAE Civil Transactions Law, solidarity is not presumed.

Article 373 requires a legal or contractual basis.

Article 382 permits the creditor to pursue one, some, or all joint debtors.

Payment by one joint debtor generally discharges the common debt.

The paying debtor may have a right of recourse/contribution.

Personal defences and common defences must be distinguished.

Settlement or release of one debtor can have consequences for the others.

An acknowledgment by one debtor does not automatically bind the others.

A judgment against one debtor does not automatically operate against the others.

Statutory construction liability is an important example of joint-and-several liability.

Joint debt is not the same as joint-and-several debt.

Indivisible obligations are also distinct from solidarity.

24. Short Revision Formula

Joint Liability = Multiple Persons + Same Legal Responsibility + Legal/Contractual Basis

For joint-and-several liability:

Creditor → One / Some / All Debtors

After payment:

Paying Debtor → Contribution Against Co-Debtors

25. Conclusion

Joint liability is an important concept in UAE civil law because it determines who can be sued, how much can be claimed, and how responsibility is distributed between several debtors.

The current Civil Transactions Law adopts a clear principle: solidarity is not presumed. It must arise from legislation or agreement. Once solidarity exists, the creditor can generally pursue the whole obligation against one or more joint-and-several debtors, while the debtor who satisfies the obligation may have rights of contribution against the others.

For examination purposes, the most important provisions are Articles 373, 380–392, together with the separate rules concerning joint debts and indivisible obligations.

Key phrase to remember:

“No presumption of solidarity; it must come from law or agreement.”

The case authorities above include DIFC decisions because publicly reported UAE mainland decisions specifically addressing modern joint-and-several liability are less consistently available in English. For a UAE-law exam answer, distinguish mainland federal law from DIFC authorities, rather than treating the DIFC cases as binding nationwide precedents.