Arbitration

Can an Arbitration Agreement Bind a Non-Signatory? — An arbitrateAD Award on Jurisdiction

By Shuhail Ahamed · Counsel — Disputes & Corporate · 8 min read
Representative matter. This case note concerns a matter in which Noura Almaazmi Advocates & Legal Consultancy acted for the successful third respondent. Private individuals are anonymised. It is general commentary on ADGM procedure and does not constitute legal advice on any specific matter.

Case at a glance

Court
arbitrateAD (Abu Dhabi International Arbitration Centre) — sole arbitrator, 2024 Rules; seat: Abu Dhabi, UAE
Case number
arbitrateAD Case No. 2024-040
Parties
Three individual claimants (anonymised) v four corporate respondents, including A real estate management company (our client) as third respondent
Decision date
23 January 2026
Status
Jurisdiction objection upheld — no jurisdiction over the claims against our client; arbitration costs and 30% of claimed legal costs awarded in its favour
Our role
acted for the successful third respondent

Arbitration binds those who agreed to it. In this final partial award — in which our team acted for the successful third respondent — the sole arbitrator held that he had no jurisdiction over claims brought against a company that never signed the arbitration agreement, and that the claimants had shown no basis under UAE law to extend it. The award is also a useful reminder that winning on jurisdiction does not mean recovering every dirham of your costs.

1. The objection

Three individual claimants commenced arbitration against four corporate respondents. Our client, the third respondent, was not a signatory to the agreement containing the arbitration clause. It objected to jurisdiction at the outset, and the sole arbitrator directed that the objection be determined as a preliminary issue, ahead of the merits.

2. The burden sits on the party asserting jurisdiction

The starting point was the burden of proof. It is for the party inviting the tribunal to exercise jurisdiction to establish that jurisdiction exists — not for the objecting party to disprove it. The claimants therefore had to show a valid basis in UAE law for extending the arbitration agreement to a company that had not signed it.

They could not. Consent is the foundation of arbitral jurisdiction, and UAE law treats an agreement to arbitrate as a departure from the default jurisdiction of the courts — something to be established, not presumed. Absent a valid basis to bind the non-signatory, the tribunal had no jurisdiction over the claims against our client.

3. A tribunal without merits jurisdiction can still decide costs

An elegant wrinkle: if the arbitrator lacks jurisdiction over the claims, can he award the successful objector its costs? Yes — because our client, while challenging jurisdiction over the claims, expressly submitted to the arbitrator’s jurisdiction for the limited purpose of determining costs. Combined with the parties’ adoption of the Rules (which require an award to allocate costs) and Art. 46.1 of the UAE Arbitration Law, that gave the arbitrator ample power to rule on costs.

4. Costs follow the event — but proportionality still bites

Applying the principle that costs follow the event, the arbitrator held our client to be the winning party on the jurisdiction issue: the claimants had commenced against a non-signatory without a valid basis to do so. He therefore ordered reimbursement of the full share of the advance on arbitration costs our client had paid.

Legal costs were treated differently. Our client claimed a six-figure sum across a pre-jurisdictional and a jurisdictional phase. The arbitrator considered that excessive: the objection had involved a single round of submissions, no oral hearing, and “conspicuously narrow” legal and factual issues. Exercising his discretion, he awarded 30% of the claim. Heads claimed without specific evidence or quantum — expert fees, translation, travel — were refused outright.

Practical takeaways

  • Take the non-signatory point early and ask for it to be heard as a preliminary issue; it can end the case against you before the merits.
  • Consent is everything — the party asserting jurisdiction must prove the basis for extending an arbitration agreement.
  • Submit expressly to the tribunal's jurisdiction for costs purposes; it preserves your costs claim without weakening the objection.
  • Size the costs claim to the work actually required. A narrow, paper-only objection will not support a full-scale fee claim.
  • Evidence every head of costs. Unparticularised expert, translation and travel claims are simply refused.

Sources & citations

  • Judgment: arbitrateAD Case No. 2024-040 (arbitrateAD (Abu Dhabi International Arbitration Centre) — sole arbitrator, 2024 Rules; seat: Abu Dhabi, UAE). Final partial award on jurisdiction dated 23 January 2026 in arbitrateAD Case No. 2024-040 (seat: Abu Dhabi). Arbitral awards are confidential and not publicly published; a copy is on file with the firm. See the ADGM Courts judgments database.

Rules & practice directions cited


This case note is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. For advice on an ADGM debt-recovery, enforcement or set-aside matter, please contact us. Last updated: 23 January 2026.

Related guides

Facing an arbitration you never agreed to?

Brief us in three minutes — same business-day response from our UAE arbitration team.

Speak to us →

Frequently asked questions

Can an arbitration agreement bind a company that never signed it?

Only if a valid legal basis for extending it is established. In this arbitrateAD award the sole arbitrator held he had no jurisdiction over a non-signatory respondent because the claimants showed no basis under UAE law to extend the arbitration agreement to it.

Who bears the burden of proving arbitral jurisdiction?

The party asserting it. The claimant must establish that jurisdiction exists; the objecting party does not have to disprove it. Consent is the foundation, and arbitration is a departure from the courts' default jurisdiction.

Can a tribunal award costs if it decides it has no jurisdiction?

Yes, where the objecting party submits to the tribunal's jurisdiction for the limited purpose of costs. Combined with the arbitration rules and Art. 46.1 of the UAE Arbitration Law, that gives the tribunal power to determine and allocate costs.

Will a successful party recover all of its legal costs?

Not necessarily. Here the arbitrator found the six-figure sum claimed excessive for an objection decided on a single round of written submissions with no hearing and narrow issues, and awarded 30% of the claim. Unevidenced heads such as expert fees and travel were refused.