Dubai Courts

Who Pays for the Predecessor’s Period? — Dubai Court of Appeal on a Successor Manager’s Liability

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 first 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
Dubai Court of Appeal — Commercial Division
Case number
Commercial Appeal 3603/2025
Judge
Judge Mohammed Ahmed Sulaiman (presiding)
Parties
A specialist services contractor (anonymised) (appellant) v A real estate management company (our client) (first respondent), its manager (second respondent) and the predecessor manager (intervening party)
Decision date
24 June 2026
Status
Claim of more than AED 8.5 million reduced to a low six-figure sum plus 5% interest; personal claim against our client's manager dismissed; remaining claims rejected
Our role
acted for the successful first respondent

When a community changes managers, who answers for the arrears that built up before the handover? In this 2026 Dubai Court of Appeal judgment — in which our team acted for the successful first respondent — a contractor pursued our client for more than AED 8.5 million of accumulated service fees. The Court held our client answerable only for its own period of appointment: a low six-figure sum. It also refused to make the company’s manager personally liable.

1. The claim

A specialist contractor had provided services to a Dubai residential community over many years. It sued our client — a real estate management company appointed as the community’s administrative supervisor — for about AED 8.5 million, said to represent the balance accumulated across the whole period. It also sued our client’s manager personally, and the predecessor manager was joined as an intervening party. At first instance the claim was dismissed for want of standing; the contractor appealed.

2. A manager answers for its own period, not its predecessor's

The decisive point was chronology. Our client was appointed only in 2020, under an arrangement coordinated with the property regulator, and a fresh services agreement between our client and the contractor was executed in 2025. The bulk of the sum claimed — about AED 8.1 million — had accrued before our client’s appointment, during the predecessor manager’s watch.

The Court held that our client could be liable only for the amount attributable to its own period — a low six-figure sum, supported by the contractor’s own acknowledgement. Historic balances remained the responsibility of the party that incurred them. A carried-forward ledger figure does not transfer with the office.

3. Privity — you cannot be sued on an agreement you never signed

The contractor leaned on a 2018 agreement between the homeowners’ association and the predecessor manager. Our client was not a party to it. The Court applied the ordinary rule that a person is bound by the contract they conclude, and no other: an agreement between two other parties, predating our client’s appointment, could not found a claim against it.

4. No personal liability for the company's manager

The attempt to make our client’s manager personally liable failed. A manager of a limited liability company who contracts in the company’s name binds the company, not himself; he answers personally only where fraud or deceit is proved, and fraud is never presumed. No evidence of fraud was offered, and the separate legal personality of the company was left intact — consistent with Dubai Court of Cassation authority.

5. Interest at 5%, not the rate claimed

The contractor sought 12% interest. The Court applied the settled judicial rate of 5% per annum, running from the date of claim until full payment, reflecting the Court of Cassation’s position that the previously customary 9% no longer suits prevailing economic conditions and bank rates.

Practical takeaways

  • On a management handover, fix the opening balance in writing. It is the single document that decides who owns the arrears.
  • A successor manager is liable only for sums accruing after its appointment; historic balances stay with the predecessor.
  • Check privity before suing the visible party rather than the contracting one.
  • Claims against directors personally need pleaded and proved fraud — assertion is not enough.
  • Expect 5% interest in Dubai, whatever rate the contract or claim form asserts.

Sources & citations

  • Judgment: Commercial Appeal 3603/2025 (Dubai Court of Appeal — Commercial Division). Dubai Court of Appeal judgment of 24 June 2026 in Commercial Appeal 3603/2025. A certified 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: 24 June 2026.

Related guides

Inherited a dispute from a predecessor manager?

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

Speak to us →

Frequently asked questions

Is a new community manager liable for arrears from before its appointment?

No. The Dubai Court of Appeal held the incoming manager answerable only for sums accruing during its own period of appointment — a low six-figure sum out of a claim exceeding AED 8.5 million. The historic balance remained the responsibility of the predecessor.

Can a party be sued on an agreement it never signed?

No. The Court applied the rule that a person is bound by the contract they conclude and no other. A 2018 agreement between the homeowners' association and the predecessor manager could not found a claim against a manager appointed later.

When is an LLC manager personally liable for company debts?

Only where fraud or deceit is proved. A manager contracting in the company's name binds the company alone, and fraud is never presumed. With no evidence of fraud, the personal claim against our client's manager was dismissed.

What interest rate do the Dubai courts award?

5% per annum. The Court of Cassation has held that the previously customary 9% no longer reflects prevailing economic conditions and bank rates, so 5% runs from the date of claim until full payment regardless of a higher rate claimed.