Arrest of vessels in the UAE

THE provisions in the UAE Federal Maritime Law (FML) of 1981 govern all maritime transactions in the UAE. Article 8 provides that the FML shall be without prejudice to international agreements ratified by the state.

The UAE is not a signatory to the International Convention relating to the Arrest of Seagoing Ships of 1952, but two principal provisions of this arrest convention are recognised by the FML.

A distinction has to be drawn between an arrest order obtained in the enforcement of priority rights conferred by the FML and an arrest order obtained in the execution of a judgment of a court of law.

This article outlines in broad terms the position in relation to provisional arrests. Article 115 of the FML sets out the circumstances in which an order for the preservatory arrest of a vessel may be obtained for the satisfaction of a maritime debt.

A maritime debt is defined as a claim in respect of a right arising in the following circumstances:

  • Damage suffered by the vessel by reason of collision or otherwise
  • Loss of life or personal injury occasioned by the vessel and arising out of the use thereof
  • Assistance and salvage
  • Contracts relating to the use or operation of the vessel under a charter party or other contract
  • Contracts relating to the carriage of goods under a charter party, bill of lading or other document
  • Loss of or damage to goods or chattels carried on board the vessel
  • General average
  • Towage or pilotage of the vessel
  • Supplies of products or equipment necessary for the maintenance or operation of the vessel, wherever the supply is effected
  • Construction, repair of equipment of the vessel, dock charges and dues
  • Disbursements made by the master, shippers, charterers or agents on account of the owner thereof
  • Wages of the master, officers and crew, and other persons working on board the vessel under a contract of maritime employment
  • Dispute as to ownership of the vessel
  • Dispute in connection with the joint ownership of the vessel, or with the possession or use thereof, or with the right to the profits arising out of the use thereof
  • Maritime mortgages

Article 122 of the FML provides that the civil court in the area where the arrest was effected shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the underlying claim, even if the arrested vessel is not registered in the UAE, in the circumstances set out below, in addition to the circumstances set out in the procedural law in force in the UAE.

  • If the claimant's usual address or main office is in the UAE
  • If the maritime debt originated in the UAE
  • If the maritime debt arose during the voyage on which the vessel was arrested
  • If the maritime debt arose out of a collision or assistance over which the court had jurisdiction; and
  • If the debt is sourced by a maritime mortgage over the arrested vessel

This is similar to the provisions of Article V11 (1) of the 1952 arrest convention except that a claim for salvage is not set out under the FML as a ground for conferring jurisdiction on a UAE court.

The FML permits a creditor to arrest not only the vessel to which the debt relates but also any other vessel owned by the debtor at the time the debt arose (Article 116).

Where several ships are owned by the same person or entity, beneficially though not legally (as in the case of tramp operators where each vessel is registered as owned by a separate company), it is unlikely that the courts in the UAE would pierce the corporate veil to examine the true ownership of the vessels.

In any event, the right to arrest other vessels owned by a debtor is not available in the following circumstances:

  • Where the dispute between the parties relates to the ownership of a vessel
  • Where the dispute is in connection with a joint ownership of the vessel or with the possession or use thereof or the right to the profits arising out of the use thereof
  • Where the claim arises out of a maritime mortgage; and
  • Where the vessel was chartered by demise with navigational control in the hands of the charterers

In the last-mentioned instance, the charterer alone shall be liable for the maritime debt connected therewith, and consequently another vessel owned by the charterer at the time the debt arose may be arrested, but not another vessel owned by the owner of the chartered vessel.