When possession can actually be recovered
There are two routes. The lease comes to an end by effluxion of time and is not renewed, in which case the tenant must give up possession. Or the landlord forfeits during the term for a breach the lease makes a forfeiting event — usually non-payment of rent, but also breach of covenant, insolvency or unauthorised assignment.
ADGM has no statutory security of tenure equivalent to the onshore rental regime, so at expiry the position is governed by the lease. An option to renew is the tenant's protection, and it is construed strictly: notice given late, in the wrong form or by the wrong entity is generally ineffective.
Forfeiture during the term is where the difficulty lies, because the right must be exercised according to the lease's own machinery and can be lost before it is used.
Waiver — the error that costs landlords the remedy
A landlord who knows of a breach and then treats the lease as continuing affirms it and waives the right to forfeit for that breach. Demanding rent, accepting rent, invoicing service charge, or granting a licence can all constitute affirmation.
The practical problem is organisational rather than legal. The decision to forfeit is taken by management or by lawyers; the acceptance of rent happens in accounts, automatically, often by standing order. Between the decision and the instruction reaching the right person, a payment is banked and the remedy is gone.
Continuing breaches — disrepair, unauthorised use — behave differently from once-and-for-all breaches, because the right to forfeit arises afresh. Non-payment of a particular quarter's rent does not. Knowing which category a breach falls into is the first question, and it determines whether a waiver is fatal or merely inconvenient.
Forfeiture, and what lawful re-entry requires
Forfeiture is exercised either by peaceable re-entry or by proceedings. Whichever is chosen, the right must exist under the lease, the contractual preconditions must be satisfied, and the landlord must not have waived it.
Where the breach is something other than non-payment of rent, the lease will usually require notice specifying the breach and allowing a reasonable period to remedy it. A notice that misdescribes the breach, or allows an inadequate period, is liable to be ineffective — and an ineffective notice followed by re-entry is an unlawful eviction.
Peaceable re-entry is quick and carries the greater risk. It requires that entry be effected without force against a person and that the premises genuinely be empty at the time, and it removes the supervision that proceedings would have provided. For a substantial tenancy, or where the facts are contested, proceedings are usually the better course even though they are slower.
Relief from forfeiture — the tenant's answer
Relief is the court's power to restore the lease notwithstanding a valid forfeiture, and it reflects the principle that a forfeiture clause is security for performance rather than a means of acquiring a windfall.
For non-payment of rent, a tenant who tenders the arrears and the landlord's costs will usually be restored, and the application should be made promptly. Delay is the single most common reason relief is refused or granted on worse terms.
For other breaches the court has a wider discretion and will weigh the seriousness of the breach, whether it has been remedied, the conduct of both parties and the disparity between the harm suffered and the value of the lease being forfeited. Sub-tenants and mortgagees have their own rights to apply, which a landlord planning a forfeiture should identify before acting rather than discover afterwards.
Residential possession
Residential tenancies on Al Maryah and Al Reem follow the lease and the applicable ADGM regulations, and the procedural requirements differ according to the ground relied on. The reforms that extended ADGM's jurisdiction brought a substantial residential stock within the framework, and tenancies that began under a different regime can raise transitional questions about which rules govern termination.
Landlords should expect the process to be more structured than the onshore practice they may be used to, and tenants should understand that the absence of an onshore-style rental committee does not mean the absence of protection — the lease and the ADGM Courts supply it.
The practical advice on both sides is the same: establish the correct ground and the correct notice before anything is served, because a defective notice restarts the clock at the landlord's expense.
Unlawful eviction, and what it actually costs
A landlord who recovers possession outside the lease machinery — changing locks, removing belongings, cutting services, or re-entering on a defective notice — commits an unlawful eviction. The consequences are not limited to reinstating the tenant.
The tenant's claim can include damages for the loss of the leasehold interest, the cost of alternative premises, damage to or loss of goods, and the business interruption caused. In a commercial setting that figure frequently exceeds the arrears the landlord was pursuing, which is how a straightforward debt claim becomes a net liability.
Interference with services deserves specific mention because it is so often thought of as pressure rather than as eviction. Cutting power, water or access to a tenant in occupation is treated as an attempt to recover possession by other means, and it is assessed accordingly.
Arrears, security and recovering the money
Possession and payment are separate objectives and should be pursued deliberately rather than together by default. Forfeiting ends the lease and with it the future rent; suing on the covenant preserves the term and the obligation to pay it.
The security available should be identified first. A rent deposit held on the terms the lease specifies, a parent or bank guarantee, and any former tenant or guarantor still liable are all routes to payment that do not require possession. A guarantee that has been discharged by a variation the guarantor never consented to is worth checking before it is relied on.
Where the tenant is insolvent the analysis changes entirely and the landlord's options narrow quickly, which is a reason to act on arrears early rather than allowing them to accumulate into a number the tenant cannot pay.
A reported matter
A published decision of the ADGM Court of First Instance in which our team acted. The parties are anonymised; the judgment itself is public. Read the case note.
Primary sources
The law and rules this page relies on. Links go to the issuing court, tribunal or legislator.
Frequently asked questions
Can I change the locks on a tenant who has not paid?
Only if the lease gives a right to forfeit, its preconditions are satisfied, the right has not been waived, and re-entry is effected without force against a person while the premises are genuinely empty. Get any of that wrong and it is an unlawful eviction — which regularly costs more than the arrears being pursued.
We accepted a rent payment after the breach. Have we lost the right to forfeit?
Probably, for that breach. Demanding or accepting rent with knowledge of a breach affirms the lease. The distinction that matters is whether the breach was once-and-for-all (non-payment of a particular quarter) or continuing (disrepair, unauthorised use) — with a continuing breach the right arises afresh.
Should we forfeit by re-entry or by proceedings?
Re-entry is faster and carries materially more risk, because it removes the court's supervision and any defect becomes an unlawful eviction. For a substantial tenancy, or where the facts are contested, proceedings are usually the better course despite being slower.
My landlord has forfeited. Can I get the lease back?
Very possibly. Relief from forfeiture operates in ADGM as it does in England, and a tenant who tenders the arrears and the landlord's costs promptly is usually restored — the court treats forfeiture as security for performance, not a windfall. Delay is the commonest reason relief is refused or granted on worse terms.
Does ADGM have security of tenure like the onshore regime?
No. There is no statutory security of tenure and no rental committee. At expiry the position is governed by the lease, which makes an option to renew the tenant's protection — and options are construed strictly, so late or misdirected notice generally loses the term.
What does an unlawful eviction actually cost?
The claim can include damages for loss of the leasehold interest, alternative premises, damage to or loss of goods, and business interruption. In a commercial setting that regularly exceeds the arrears, turning a debt claim into a net liability.
Can we cut the power to make a tenant leave?
No. Interference with services to a tenant in occupation is treated as an attempt to recover possession by other means and is assessed as eviction, not as pressure.
Do we have to tell the sub-tenant or the bank?
Identify them first. Sub-tenants and mortgagees have their own rights to apply for relief, and a landlord who forfeits without establishing who holds derivative interests tends to discover them at the worst moment.
Should we forfeit, or sue for the rent?
They are different objectives. Forfeiting ends the lease and with it the future rent; suing on the covenant preserves the term and the obligation. Decide which you actually want before acting — and check the rent deposit, any guarantee, and whether a former tenant remains liable first.
The tenant is insolvent. What changes?
A great deal, and the landlord's options narrow quickly. That is the argument for acting on arrears early rather than letting them build into a figure the tenant cannot pay and a process the landlord cannot control.