GLA & Company

This article reviews Kuwait’s draft Decree-Law on Digital Commerce against the text of the proposed law and related materials, and refines the analysis for legal accuracy, completeness, and readability. Legislative Status and Scope The Ministry of Commerce and Industry (MOCI) has advanced a draft Decree-Law regulating the digital commerce sector in Kuwait. Following Cabinet approval, the Decree-Law will be submitted for ratification by His Highness the Emir. Under the draft’s final provisions, the executive regulation must be issued within one year of publication of the Decree-Law in the Official Gazette, and the Decree-Law will take effect one month after such executive regulation is published. The law establishes a unified framework for “digital commerce,” defined as activities conducted wholly or partially by technological means for trading goods, providing services, advertising, or exchanging related data. It applies across digital stores, platforms, and intermediaries, and incorporates consumer rights, advertising standards, data security, electronic records and signatures, logistics, electronic payments, dispute resolution, and a structured penalties regime. Institutional Architecture and MOCI Mandate The draft Decree-Law designates MOCI as the primary regulator and supervisor of the digital commerce sector. Its mandate comprises: Policy and rulemaking. MOCI formulates public policy and issues necessary implementing decisions and regulations, including specialized instruments covering electronic auctions, intermediary platforms, and a monetary penalties regulation for non‑criminal violations. Registration infrastructure. MOCI establishes electronic registers for digital commerce providers and any other registers it deems necessary to organize the sector. Registration in the designated MOCI registers is a precondition to operate in the sector. Supervisory powers. MOCI supervises compliance, may require providers to furnish data, information, or documents, and coordinates with relevant authorities (including for intellectual property complaints). Enforcement tools. MOCI may notify violators and, where non‑compliance persists, block the offending digital store according to procedures set in the executive regulation. MOCI also oversees a Dispute Resolution Committee and a Violations Committee to adjudicate disputes and violations and to refer criminal matters to the Public Prosecution. Registration and Provider Disclosure Obligations The law requires all providers operating in the digital commerce sector to be entered in MOCI’s electronic registers before commencing activity. Providers must disclose, prominently and clearly in their digital stores: Identity and trade name (as applicable), registration details and number, and available contact methods including email, phone numbers, and electronic communication links. Clear terms and conditions of contracting, including the steps to form an electronic contract, the provider’s identity, final pricing and all fees, delivery terms and dates, payment methods, return and exchange policies, and any other information the executive regulation may require. Upon contracting, providers must issue an Arabic electronic invoice (with any additional language as a supplement) reflecting, at a minimum, the price, total amount inclusive of all charges, delivery details, payment method, and other mandatory data. Providers must maintain an electronic record preserving sent/received documents in their original electronic form for at least five years and present them to MOCI upon request. Providers must also comply with the decisions of the National Cybersecurity Center concerning data security measures prescribed in the executive regulation. Consumer Rights and Remedies The draft Decree-Law strengthens consumer rights in digital transactions: Error correction. If a consumer commits an error when using a provider’s electronic contracting system and the system does not offer a means to correct errors, the consumer may cancel or modify the erroneous part, provided the provider is notified promptly and the consumer has not benefited from the product or service. Returns and cooling‑off. Without prejudice to statutory or contractual warranties, consumers may rescind an electronic contract within 14 days of product receipt to return or exchange and recover the price via the original payment method or an agreed alternative, without additional fees, provided the product is in its original condition. The law carves out specific exceptions, including for perishable goods, customized products, and certain high‑value products (e.g., precious metals and specified goods) which are subject to a shortened 24‑hour return period. The executive regulation will further delineate exceptions and digital services cases. Delivery delays. If delivery is delayed beyond the agreed date or 14 days elapse from the agreed delivery date, the consumer may terminate the contract and recover any sums paid. These rights are supplemented by a general principle that providers must not deviate from advertised terms except in a manner that benefits the consumer. Advertising, Promotion, and Influencer Activity The law imposes prescriptive standards for digital advertising and promotion: Mandatory content. Digital advertisements must include the provider’s name and price, a clear and accurate description of the product or service, and provider contact details. For advertisements placed via social media accounts registered with MOCI, the ad may be linked to the provider’s official account containing the required information. Prohibited content. Advertisements may not contain false or misleading statements, violate public order or morals, or include counterfeit or unauthorized marks, images, or trademarks, or language that directly or indirectly misleads consumers. Cure periods and blocking. MOCI must notify advertisers of violations of advertising rules and grant 24 hours to rectify. If unremedied within that period, MOCI may block the offending store in coordination with competent authorities in accordance with executive procedures. Binding effect. Providers are bound by their advertising terms and may only deviate if it benefits the consumer. The law defines “influencers” as social media personalities who influence consumer decisions through content or promotion. Influencer marketing must comply with advertising rules, and influencers are prohibited from misleading, false, or unauthorized promotional content. Compensation to influencers should be routed through secure, traceable channels consistent with anti‑money laundering standards and Central Bank of Kuwait (CBK) payment-system requirements, and in compliance with the law’s advertising and registration framework where applicable. Electronic Payments, Technologies, and Logistics The law modernizes operational rails for digital commerce: Electronic payments. Providers must offer simple, transparent, non‑discriminatory electronic payment options consistent with CBK instructions. Providers may only use payment service providers licensed by CBK. Imposing additional fees on electronic payment use requires prior CBK approval and clear disclosure in the electronic contract. The executive regulation will prescribe further payment-use rules. Records and signatures. The law recognizes electronic records and requires retention of electronic documents for not less than five years. It regulates electronic signatures in the sector and sets grounds for cancellation (e.g., death or loss of capacity for natural persons, dissolution for legal persons). Emerging technologies. Providers may use modern technologies such as blockchain and smart contracts with consumers, subject to conditions set in the executive regulation. Innovation pathway. Persons proposing innovations, products, or services not yet covered by the legislative framework may apply to MOCI with a description and merits of the proposed solution, under rules to be set in the executive regulation. Functionally, this creates a structured “sandbox‑like” avenue for controlled innovation in digital commerce. Logistics and delivery. Providers may offer logistics services directly or via licensed third parties in or outside Kuwait, or via compliant technological means. Providers must clearly disclose logistics costs, delivery options, and timelines in the electronic contract, and may not impose additional logistics fees unless pre‑specified in the contract terms. Committees and Enforcement Processes The draft Decree-Law establishes two specialized bodies within MOCI: Dispute Resolution Committee. Chaired by a judge (no lower than Counselor) seconded by the High Council of Judiciary, with two members from relevant MOCI departments. The Committee ensures transparent, expedited resolution of non‑criminal e‑commerce disputes, including whether goods/services are defective, conform to descriptions, and meet their intended purpose. It hears grievances against store blocking decisions, may impose monetary penalties for non‑criminal violations in accordance with the monetary penalties regulation, order rectification within a specified period, or refer matters to the Public Prosecution where crimes are suspected. Procedural rules, decision‑making, notifications, and remuneration are to be set in the executive regulation. Violations Committee. Chaired by an adviser from the Fatwa and Legislation Department, with two MOCI members. It examines violations referred by MOCI investigators and may dismiss cases, refer non‑criminal matters to the Dispute Resolution Committee, or refer criminal violations to the Public Prosecution. It may also order temporary blocking of a provider’s store for up to 30 days in accordance with the law. Penalties and Ancillary Sanctions The penalties chapter adopts a deterrent approach. Without prejudice to harsher penalties under other laws, imprisonment of up to one year and fines from KD 1,000 to KD 10,000 may be imposed, including for: Operating in the digital commerce sector without registration where required by law. Submitting false data or forged/simulated documents for registration in MOCI’s registers. Offering illegal products or services, or products/services contrary to public order, morals, or public health via technological means. Failing to comply with final decisions of the Dispute Resolution Committee in contravention of the executive regulation. Penalties are doubled for repeat offenders. Courts may order confiscation of tools used to commit offenses or proceeds derived therefrom. Procedurally, designated MOCI staff will have inspection and judicial-seizure authority in accordance with the law and the executive regulation. Intersections with Related Legal Regimes Intellectual property. The draft confirms that materials used in marketing or delivery (e.g., images, videos, text, logos, software) are subject to Kuwait’s copyright framework. MOCI, coordinating with competent bodies, will handle IP complaints in the digital commerce context. Cybersecurity and data protection. Providers must implement cybersecurity measures promulgated by the National Cybersecurity Center. The executive regulation will specify technical and organizational measures for securing data at rest and in transit. Financial services perimeter and AML/CFT. Electronic payments and settlement activity must comply with CBK rules. Compensation flows to influencers and marketing agencies should be processed through licensed channels and remain traceable, in alignment with anti‑money laundering standards and CBK requirements. Civil and commercial law. In matters not expressly covered by the Decree-Law, general civil and commercial statutes apply, provided they do not conflict with the digital nature of transactions. Practical Implications and Preparatory Steps The Decree-Law transitions Kuwait from a largely permissive environment to a prescriptive, enforcement‑focused regime. Providers, platforms, marketplaces, and influencers should prepare to: Map activities against MOCI’s registration requirements and complete registration prior to operation. Update store disclosures, terms and conditions, privacy and cybersecurity policies, and advertising practices to align with the law and forthcoming executive regulation. Implement compliant electronic invoicing in Arabic, electronic recordkeeping for at least five years, and processes for 14‑day returns and delivery delay remedies, including exception management. Align electronic payment acceptance, pricing, and fee practices with CBK rules; engage only CBK‑licensed payment providers; and verify that any additional fees have prior CBK approval and are clearly disclosed. Establish internal controls for advertising content review, influencer vetting, contract templates, and 24‑hour remediation workflows following MOCI notices. Build a dispute handling and remediation program calibrated to the Dispute Resolution Committee’s jurisdiction and procedures. For novel technologies or business models, prepare documentation to utilize MOCI’s innovation pathway governed by the executive regulation. Conclusion The draft Decree-Law is a pivotal step in Kuwait’s digital transformation. It clarifies definitions, codifies consumer rights and advertising standards, formalizes registration and supervisory infrastructure, embeds data security and payments compliance, and creates clear dispute-resolution and enforcement pathways. Its structured approach—to registration, disclosures, consumer remedies, advertising integrity, secure payments, and penalties—will elevate market trust and transparency and position Kuwait as a more attractive, well‑regulated hub for digital commerce. While the law will become effective one month after publication of the executive regulation, businesses should begin alignment now across registration, contracting, payments, cybersecurity, advertising, logistics, and dispute handling to ensure a smooth transition to compliance. Authors: Ashraf Hendi, Partner and Head of Banking & Finance and Maryam Tarek, Associate.

The Kuwait Competition Protection Agency (“CPA”) has issued Board Resolution No. 32 of 2026 (the "Resolution"), introducing updated financial thresholds for merger control filings in Kuwait. The Resolution repeals and replaces the previous threshold framework established under Resolution No. 26 of 2021. The new thresholds entered into force upon publication in the Official Gazette on 5 April 2026. We are privileged to have been consulted by the CPA and the Kuwait Ministry of Commerce and Industry to provide advisory support in connection with the development of the new threshold framework. Our involvement in this process reflects our firm's deep expertise in Kuwaiti competition law and our longstanding commitment to supporting the continued evolution of the regulatory landscape in Kuwait. We are proud to have contributed to these meaningful reforms, which represent a significant step forward in aligning Kuwait's merger control regime with international best practices. Legal Framework The merger control regime in Kuwait is governed by Law No. 72 of 2020 Concerning the Protection of Competition, which establishes the CPA as the competent authority for reviewing economic concentrations. Under Article 12 of the Law, parties to an economic concentration must submit an application to the CPA prior to implementation if the value of registered assets or total amount of sales in Kuwait exceeds the aggregate and individual thresholds set by the Board. Pursuant to Article 10, the Board is empowered to specify the conditions and controls for determining which transactions constitute notifiable economic concentrations. Under the Executive Regulations issued pursuant to Resolution No. 14 of 2021, persons involved in economic concentrations must file an application at least 60 days prior to the preparation of the transaction agreement. The CPA is required to assess the application within 90 days (extendable by a further 90 days), and parties may not complete the concentration until the Board has issued its decision. Scope of Application The notification thresholds apply to transactions that constitute an "economic concentration" under the Law. This is defined as a lasting change in control in the relevant market, arising in cases of mergers, acquisitions, and joint ventures between two or more persons that carry on an independent economic activity on a lasting basis. Specifically, the Law captures: (a) mergers of two or more persons by amalgamation or combination resulting in the acquisition of control; (b) the direct or indirect acquisition of control over another person or persons, whether by acquisition of assets, property rights, shares, liabilities, or any other means; and (c) joint ventures that result in an autonomous economic or commercial activity on a lasting basis. New Financial Thresholds Under Board Resolution No. 32 of 2026, a filing is required where any of the following thresholds are met: Any party to the concentration achieves annual sales in Kuwait exceeding KWD 1,500,000 (one million five hundred thousand Kuwaiti Dinars), based on the audited financial statements for the last fiscal year preceding the concentration. The combined annual sales of the parties in Kuwait exceed KWD 3,000,000 (three million Kuwaiti Dinars), provided that the target company or business achieves annual sales in Kuwait of not less than KWD 1,500,000 (one million five hundred thousand Kuwaiti Dinars), based on the audited financial statements for the last fiscal year preceding the concentration. The value of the registered assets of the parties in Kuwait exceeds KWD 7,500,000 (seven million five hundred thousand Kuwaiti Dinars), based on the audited asset data for the last fiscal year preceding the concentration. For these purposes, "sales in Kuwait" refers to sales actually realized in the Kuwaiti market, whether achieved directly or through branches, subsidiaries, or controlled entities. "Assets in Kuwait" refers to registered assets owned or used in conducting economic activity within Kuwait, as reflected in audited financial statements. Comparison with Prior Thresholds The new thresholds represent a substantial increase from the previous thresholds that were in effect under Resolution No. 26 of 2021. The following points summarize the key changes: Individual Sales Threshold: Under Resolution No. 26 of 2021, the threshold was KWD 500,000. Under Resolution No. 32 of 2026, the threshold is now KWD 1,500,000 — an increase of KWD 1,000,000 (200%). Combined Sales Threshold: Under Resolution No. 26 of 2021, the threshold was KWD 750,000. Under Resolution No. 32 of 2026, the threshold is now KWD 3,000,000 (with a minimum target threshold of KWD 1,500,000) — an increase of KWD 2,250,000 (300%). Registered Assets Threshold: Under Resolution No. 26 of 2021, the threshold was KWD 2,250,000. Under Resolution No. 32 of 2026, the threshold is now KWD 7,500,000 — an increase of KWD 5,250,000 (approximately 233%). In addition, the new Resolution introduces a minimum target threshold requirement for combined sales filings. The target company or business must now achieve annual sales of at least KWD 1,500,000 in Kuwait before the combined sales threshold applies. This requirement did not exist under the prior regime. Impact on Merger Control Filings The significant increase in financial thresholds will have material practical implications for parties to economic concentrations in Kuwait: Reduced Filing Burden: The tripling of monetary thresholds means that many transactions that would have previously required notification will no longer meet the filing criteria. Smaller and mid-sized transactions with limited local nexus will fall below the new thresholds, reducing the administrative burden on both market participants and the CPA. Target-Specific Requirement: The introduction of the minimum target threshold requirement (KWD 1,500,000 in annual sales for the target) ensures that the combined sales test only captures transactions where the target has a meaningful presence in Kuwait. This refinement aligns Kuwait's approach more closely with international merger control practice, which typically requires both an acquirer and target nexus. Focus on Larger Transactions: The CPA will be able to focus its resources on reviewing larger, potentially more impactful transactions. The increased thresholds suggest a policy shift toward concentrating regulatory scrutiny on economic concentrations that are more likely to affect competition in local markets. Continued Mandatory Pre-Closing Notification: Despite the threshold increases, Kuwait's merger control regime remains a mandatory, suspensory system. Parties that meet any of the new thresholds must still obtain CPA clearance before completing the transaction. Under Article 14 of the Competition Law, parties are prohibited from performing any actions or procedures to complete the concentration prior to the issuance of the Board's decision. Failure to file a required notification may result in financial penalties of up to 10% of total revenues earned by the parties during the previous fiscal year. Transitional Considerations and Applicability The new financial thresholds are applicable as of 5 April 2026, the date of publication in the Official Gazette. Resolution No. 32 of 2026 expressly repeals the prior Resolution No. 26 of 2021 establishing the former thresholds. Critically, parties to an economic concentration who have not yet filed as of 5 April 2026 must reassess their transaction against the new financial thresholds — rather than the prior thresholds — to determine whether a filing obligation is triggered. This means that transactions which would have been notifiable under the old thresholds may no longer require CPA approval if they fall below the new thresholds. Conversely, transactions already cleared or pending before the CPA are unaffected by the threshold change. Parties contemplating transactions should therefore carefully evaluate whether the new thresholds are met before proceeding. Where a transaction that was previously notifiable now falls below the revised thresholds, no filing is required and the parties may proceed to completion without CPA clearance. However, parties should note that the CPA retains authority under the Competition Law to review transactions that may affect competition in Kuwait, even where formal thresholds are not met, through its general monitoring and enforcement powers. Looking Ahead The issuance of updated thresholds under Resolution No. 32 of 2026 reflects the CPA’s continued efforts to develop and refine its regulatory framework in line with evolving market conditions and international merger control practice. The substantial increase in thresholds represents a calibration toward focusing regulatory resources on transactions with more significant competitive impact in Kuwait, while reducing the compliance burden on smaller transactions. This step contributes to greater clarity and predictability in the application of merger control rules, which is welcomed by the business community. Practical Recommendations Notwithstanding the increased thresholds, parties should be aware that the CPA continues to adopt an active approach in monitoring transactions and market developments, including those with indirect effects in Kuwait. Early engagement with the CPA, particularly through the pre-notification consultation process established under the Executive Regulations, remains advisable for complex transactions or those close to the threshold boundaries. Proper structuring and thorough analysis of local nexus remain key to ensuring a smooth and efficient clearance process where a filing is required. Authors: Asad Ahmad, Partner and Head of Antitrust & Competition and Khaled Al Makhezeem, Associate.

In line with the Capital Markets Authority’s (the “CMA”) ongoing efforts to develop and modernise the regulatory framework governing securities activities, and in pursuit of alignment with international standards in capital markets best practices, the CMA has approved a comprehensive regulatory framework governing Exchange Traded Funds (“ETFs”). This development represents a significant milestone in the evolution of Kuwait’s investment landscape, providing investors with access to a modern investment vehicle that combines the diversification benefits of collective investment schemes with the liquidity and accessibility of publicly traded securities. Regulatory framework & Market development The newly introduced framework establishes the legal and regulatory foundations for the establishment, operation, listing, and trading of ETFs on Kuwait’s stock exchange. The framework is designed in accordance with internationally recognised regulatory standards and aims to create a transparent and efficient environment for both fund operators and investors. By formally regulating ETFs, the CMA has expanded the range of investment products available in the Kuwaiti market, allowing investors to gain exposure to diversified portfolios through a single listed instrument. This development is expected to contribute to the continued modernisation of the capital markets sector and support the introduction of innovative investment solutions. Key features of Exchange Traded Funds An ETF is an open-ended investment fund whose units are listed and traded on a stock exchange throughout market hours at prevailing market prices. Unlike traditional investment funds, ETF units can be bought and sold in real time, providing investors with enhanced flexibility and liquidity. Under the CMA framework, ETFs may be designed to track the performance of a specific index, including equity, fixed income, commodity, or other eligible benchmark indices. Fund units may also be created through in-kind subscriptions using a basket of underlying assets, a mechanism commonly utilised in global ETF structures. The framework further introduces specialised market participants, including authorised participants and market makers, whose role is to facilitate the creation and redemption of units and support market liquidity. These mechanisms are intended to ensure efficient price discovery and minimise deviations between market prices and the underlying net asset value of the fund. The framework also permits securities lending and borrowing transactions, subject to prescribed limits, while allowing for the listing of certain foreign ETFs and feeder ETFs. These measures enhance investment diversity and broaden access to international markets through regulated channels. Conclusion The CMA’s introduction of a dedicated regulatory framework for Exchange Traded Funds marks a significant advancement in Kuwait’s capital market development. By providing a modern, transparent, and liquid investment product, the framework broadens investment opportunities for market participants while enhancing market efficiency and competitiveness. Authors: Mohammed Al Awadhi, Partner and Ahmed AlBuaijan, Trainee Lawyer

Kuwait has taken a landmark step forward in establishing a comprehensive legal framework for its rapidly expanding digital commerce sector. On 1 March 2026, Decree-Law No. 10 of 2026 (the "Law") was published in the Kuwait Official Gazette, introducing a sweeping regulatory regime that touches virtually every aspect of online commerce-from platform registration and consumer protection to influencer marketing and blockchain technology. For businesses operating in or eyeing entry into Kuwait's digital marketplace, this legislation represents both a challenge and an opportunity: a challenge to align operations with rigorous new compliance standards, and an opportunity to build consumer trust in an increasingly regulated and transparent market. The Law forms a cornerstone of Kuwait's Vision 2035 strategy, which aims to accelerate digital transformation and sustainable economic development. With e-commerce penetration rising sharply across the Gulf region, Kuwait has joined its GCC neighbors in codifying rules that balance innovation incentives with robust consumer safeguards. Who Does This Law Apply To? The Law, under Article 2, regulates the digital commerce sector within Kuwait. It covers any activity-whether conducted fully or partially through electronic means-that involves dealing in goods, providing services, advertising, or exchanging data. Crucially, this includes social media platforms used for commercial purposes. Article 3 mandates that all persons must register with the Ministry of Commerce and Industry before engaging in any digital commerce activity-a requirement that will have significant implications for the thousands of small and medium enterprises currently operating informally through social media channels. What Are Providers Required to Disclose? Transparency lies at the heart of the new regulatory architecture. Article 10 requires providers to display prominently on their platforms: their name or trade name, registration number, and comprehensive contact information (including email, phone numbers, and website links). Article 11 mandates clear and accessible contract terms covering: (i) product or service descriptions; (ii) final pricing inclusive of any additional fees such as delivery charges; (iii) accepted payment methods; (iv) delivery arrangements and execution timelines; (v) validity periods for promotional offers or discounted prices; and (vi) return and exchange policies. Once a transaction is concluded, Article 12 requires providers to issue an electronic invoice in Arabic (with the option to include additional languages). The invoice must specify the price, all fees and total amount, delivery date and location, and payment method used. For disputes, Article 13 requires providers to establish and maintain transparent and effective complaints mechanisms, with records retained for a minimum of six months. Consumer Rights: The 14-Day Withdrawal Window Consumer protection provisions are among the Law's most consequential features. Article 17 grants consumers a 14-day cooling-off period from receipt of any product, during which they may withdraw from the contract, return the product, and obtain a full refund via the original payment method (or another agreed method)-provided the product is returned in its original condition and at no additional cost to the consumer. However, for precious metals and high-value items-to be specified by subsequent ministerial decision-this withdrawal window contracts dramatically to just 24 hours from receipt. Businesses dealing in luxury goods, jewelry, or precious commodities should monitor these ministerial determinations closely. Article 17 also carves out several exceptions where the right of return does not apply: products already used by the consumer; items manufactured to the consumer's specifications; perishable goods or products that expire within a short period; services related to accommodation, transport, food, or entertainment provided on a specific date or period; software or digital products where download has been completed; digital or electronic cards where the activation code has been delivered (regardless of whether used); and other cases to be specified by implementing regulations. Advertising and Influencer Rules: A New Era of Accountability The Law introduces stringent requirements for digital advertising. Article 18 mandates that all advertisements include the provider's name and product/service price, a clear and accurate description, and contact details (with an exception for advertisements through registered social media accounts linking to the provider's official profile containing all required information). Article 19 prohibits advertisements containing false, misleading, or deceptive statements; content contrary to public order or morals; counterfeit trademarks or imagery used without legal authorization; or any language that could directly or indirectly mislead consumers. Influencer marketing receives particularly detailed treatment under Article 23. Providers utilizing influencers must: retain all records, data, and agreements relating to influencers for a minimum of five years and produce them to the Ministry upon request; process all influencer payments through verifiable payment methods compliant with anti-money laundering standards and Central Bank regulations; and refrain from engaging influencers in promotional campaigns involving consumer deception or financial regulation evasion. Emerging Technologies and the Regulatory Sandbox The Law takes a notably forward-looking approach to emerging technologies. Article 30 permits providers to utilize modern technologies such as blockchain and smart contracts in managing consumer transactions, subject to rules to be established in the implementing regulations. Article 31 introduces a "regulatory sandbox" mechanism. Entrepreneurs wishing to launch innovative products, services, or business models not covered by existing legislation may apply to the Ministry for permission to operate within a supervised experimental environment. The Ministry may establish a production-oriented testing environment with limited scope, allowing commercial operation under Ministry supervision while ensuring consumer protection, cybersecurity, and financial transaction integrity. Successful innovations may subsequently be recommended for integration into Kuwait's formal legal framework. Cybersecurity and Payments Cybersecurity obligations receive explicit attention under Article 32, which requires providers to apply cybersecurity standards in force within Kuwait (as established by the National Cybersecurity Centre) and to periodically update their data protection systems to address emerging cyber threats. On the payments front, Article 28 mandates that providers offer electronic payment options that are simple, transparent, and non-discriminatory, in accordance with Central Bank of Kuwait directives. Critically, providers may only engage payment service providers licensed by the Central Bank-a requirement designed to ensure the integrity and security of consumer financial transactions.  Penalties: Real Consequences for Non-Compliance The Law carries meaningful enforcement mechanisms. Article 39 prescribes penalties of imprisonment for up to one year and/or fines ranging from KD 1,000 to KD 10,000 for violations of key provisions-including Articles 3, 15, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 31, and 32. The same penalties apply to those who submit false data or forged documents for registration, offer unlawful or public-order-violating products or services, or fail to comply with Dispute Settlement Committee decisions. Repeat offenders face doubled penalties, and under Article 40, courts may order confiscation of tools used in commission of offenses and any proceeds derived therefrom. Notably, Article 41 extends liability to the person responsible for the actual management of a corporate entity if they had knowledge of the violation and their failure to fulfill their duties contributed to its occurrence, or if they derived personal benefit. The corporate entity itself remains jointly liable for any financial penalties and compensation. Article 42 permits settlement of criminal offenses under the Law prior to final judgment, pursuant to a decision by the Ministry Undersecretary-offering a potential off-ramp for businesses that identify and address compliance failures promptly. What Happens Next? Decree-Law No. 10 of 2026 marks a transformational moment for digital commerce in Kuwait. Article 44 requires the Minister to issue the implementing regulations within one year from the date of publication in the Official Gazette. Under Article 45, the Law will take effect one month after the implementing regulations are published-meaning the precise enforcement timeline remains to be determined. Businesses should not wait for the implementing regulations to begin compliance preparations. The Law's core obligations-registration requirements, transparency disclosures, consumer return policies, advertising compliance, influencer documentation, and cybersecurity measures-are already clearly articulated. Companies currently operating digital platforms in Kuwait, or planning market entry, should conduct comprehensive gap analyses against the new requirements and begin developing the necessary policies, documentation, and technical infrastructure. For businesses utilizing influencers, the five-year record-keeping requirements and payment traceability mandates will require careful review of existing commercial arrangements. Those interested in emerging technologies such as blockchain or smart contracts should monitor the regulatory sandbox provisions closely. Importantly, given the prevalence of social media-driven commerce in Kuwait, businesses selling through platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter) must pay particular attention to the registration and advertising requirements. Informal commercial activity through unregistered social media accounts will no longer be permissible. Given the penalties for non-compliance-including potential imprisonment and substantial fines-early and thorough preparation is not merely advisable; it is essential. Authors: Asad Ahmad, Partner and Liana Rashid, Trainee Lawyer

Kuwait's Ministry of Health has issued Ministerial Decision No. 139 of 2026, adopting the updated regulatory framework for the Wafid Programme. The Decision was issued on 7 May 2026 and gives effect in Kuwait to the updated Wafid regulations approved by the Council of Health Ministers of the Gulf Cooperation Council states. The GCC Health Ministers' Council, during its 38th conference in Sha'ban 1415 AH, corresponding to January 1995, adopted a decision to establish a programme for conducting medical examinations for expatriates entering the GCC countries (Wafid Programme). The Wafid Programme is the GCC framework used to regulate medical examinations for expatriates before they enter GCC countries for work, residence, visits, or other purposes determined by the Council. The purpose of the new regulations is straightforward, but important. They are designed to ensure that expatriates are medically fit and free from diseases that may pose a risk to public health and community safety. This sits within a longer GCC public health framework, to maintain the health security of the GCC community. Following that decision, committees are to be formed to set the relevant health requirements and medical examination regulations for expatriates. Their role included determining the necessary clinical assessments, laboratory tests, and radiological examinations to confirm physical and mental fitness and to ensure that expatriates are free from diseases, particularly infectious diseases, that could threaten the safety and security of the GCC community. Since its establishment, the GCC Health Council has worked with member states to expand the scope of the Wafid Programme to include most labour-exporting countries. Against that background, the 2026 regulations should be seen as an update to an existing regional system rather than a completely new policy direction. They modernise the rules around accreditation, inspection, compliance, objections, and the use of the Wafid electronic system. A key feature of the new framework is that it gives the Council of Health for the GCC States a central role in approving and monitoring medical examination centres. Under Articles 2 and 3, the Council, or its delegate, determines the health requirements for expatriates and oversees the accreditation of medical examination facilities in the countries from which expatriates travel. The Council is also responsible for implementing examination rules, forming the central and technical committees, notifying embassies and consulates of approved facilities, collecting programme-related fees, applying penalties, and continuing to develop the Wafid electronic platform. The regulations also introduce a clearer governance structure. The Central Committee is responsible, under Article 9, for updating clinical, laboratory, and radiological examination requirements, reviewing reports, setting standards for the selection and assessment of medical centres, and determining whether facility visits should be physical or virtual. Technical committees, dealt with in Articles 11 to 14, carry out evaluations and site visits, prepare reports, and assess whether facilities are meeting the required standards. This should make the accreditation process more consistent, but it also means approved centres will need to be ready for closer scrutiny. For medical facilities, the practical obligations are detailed. Article 15 requires approved centres to use the Wafid electronic system, register expatriate data before conducting medical examinations, carry out all required tests according to the applicable standards, maintain and update examination equipment, preserve the confidentiality of medical results, and issue medical fitness certificates within a maximum of three days from the date of examination. Facilities must also follow infection control requirements, safely dispose of medical waste, and bear full responsibility for any negligence, shortcoming, or error in the medical examination process. The evaluation thresholds are worth noting. Unless the Council decides otherwise, Article 28 provides that facilities in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Egypt must obtain a 95% evaluation score, facilities in Asia and the Middle East must obtain 90%, and facilities in Africa must obtain 85%. Where a facility is assessed virtually, its accreditation is conditional on completion of the field visit and the outcome of that visit. If the required main standards or evaluation score are not met, the Central Committee may withdraw the accreditation under Article 29. Medical fitness certificates issued by approved facilities are valid for two months from the date of issuance for visa purposes, as set out in Article 45, and if a facility violates the regulations, the Council may take the measures it considers appropriate, including the procedures prescribed for facility violations. The regulations also confirm that medical examination procedures apply to all expatriates entering any GCC state for work or residence, subject to age-category exemptions determined by each GCC state, and vaccination records must be uploaded to the Wafid system. Healthcare providers participating in the Wafid Programme should review their internal procedures, staff training, data handling practices, and readiness for compliance with these issued Regulations. For employers and recruitment companies, the updated Regulations also matter because delays or non-compliance at the medical examination stage can affect visa processing. For guidance on how these updated Wafid Programme regulations may affect healthcare providers, employers, or recruitment processes, contact GLA & Co. Ministerial Decision No. 139 of 2026 was published in the Official Gazette (Kuwait Al-Youm), Issue No. 1791, dated 17 May 2026. Authors: Asad Ahmad, Partner and Liana Rashid, Trainee Lawyer

Kuwait has taken a significant leap toward modernizing its notarization system with the issuance of Decree Law No. 147 of 2025, which amends provisions of Law No. 10 of 2020 on notarization. The new law unveils structural reforms that impact how a power of attorney (POA) is granted, renewed, and authenticated in Kuwait. This legislative update doesn’t just strengthen but also shifts the country to align with global best practices in documentation and E-governance. The reform aims to reduce miss use of indefinite authorizations while ensuring periodic verification of representation rights and accelerating Kuwait’s transition toward digital legal services. The Key Changes Include A five-year limit on the validity of all new Powers of Attorney. The automatic expiration of pre-existing POAs within two years. The formal recognition of electronic signatures as legally binding and enforceable. The Decree applies to the following All new Power of attorneys Existing notarized powers executed before the decree’s issuance, which remain valid for only two years from the date the law takes effect. Electronic notarization systems approved by the Ministry of Justice and related government entities. After the expiry of the transitional two-year period, any old power of attorney not renewed in accordance with the new law will automatically lose validity. Key Legal additions under Article 2 of the Decree Article 2 of Decree Law No 147 of 2025 adds two new articles to Law 10 of 2020 which are Article 5 bis and Article 9 bis which represent the foundation of the reform. Article 5 bis states that “Except for commercial agencies and any agencies exempted by decision of the Minister of Justice, a power of attorney shall be valid for five (5) years unless a shorter term is agreed or the agency terminates for another reason. The notarization shall specify the expiry date. The expiration of the notarization period shall not affect the validity of the agency between the parties”. This addition is designated to prevent endless delegation of authority and ensure that representation rights are periodically renewed reducing outdated authorizations. While Article 9 states that “The concerned parties or their representatives may appear before the notary in person, through the accredited electronic system, or by visual connection using modern or electronic means. The implementing regulation shall prescribe the procedures for each case, determine when personal attendance is required or remote appearance permitted, and regulate the manner of recording and evidencing such notarizations in the official registers and all other related provisions”. This addition established legal infrastructure for full digital notarization, in line with Kuwait’s shift toward online government services and paperless documentation. Why legal practitioners should take note The reform closes loopholes created by issuing lifetime power of attorney. Clients can now sign and validate documents remotely through secure electronic systems. Lawyers and companies must review and renew all existing power of attorney before the two-year deadline. Firms that adapt early can guide clients through renewals, reducing risk exposure and maintaining validity of representation. Conclusion The introduction of Decree law No.147 of 2025 marks a pivotal moment in Kuwait’s notarization framework. By limiting the duration of Powers of Attorney, mandating renewal and embracing electronic and remote notarization, the law stabilizes legal certainty with technological progress. These amendments especially the additions to article 2 promote accountability and prevent misuse of indefinite authorizations and modernize how legal documents are executed and authenticated. Critically, these reforms are set to significantly streamline national projects across Kuwait by fostering greater efficiency and transparency in legal processes. This digital transformation directly supports the ambitious objectives of Kuwait Vision 2035, positioning the country as a leader in digital legal services and contributing to sustainable economic development. For practitioners the reform presents an opportunity to lead clients into an era of digital security and transparent documentation aligning with the nation’s strategic future. Authors: Asad Ahmad, Legal director and Ahmed Al Buaijan, Trainee Lawyer

The rapid expansion of consumer delivery services through smart platforms and mobile applications has transformed the way goods and services reach consumers in Kuwait and the GCC as a whole. While this digital growth has enhanced convenience and market access, it has also raised significant competition concerns. In response, the Kuwait Competition Protection Agency (“CPA”) issued its Guideline Manual for the Consumer Delivery Services Sector Via Smart Platforms and Applications (2026) ("Guideline"). The Guideline establishes a comprehensive framework for platforms, product sellers, and delivery service providers operating in this market. The Guideline is grounded in Competition Protection Law No. 72 of 2020 and its implementing regulations and reflects the CPA’s increasing focus on regulating digital markets. It is intended not only as an enforcement tool but also as a preventive mechanism designed to raise awareness and promote fair competition in a sector characterized by rapid innovation and high market concentration. Purpose of the Guideline The primary objective of the Guideline is to create a competitive environment that protects consumers while ensuring fair treatment of market participants. It applies to digital platforms that act as intermediaries between product sellers, delivery service providers, and consumers within the State of Kuwait. The Guideline excludes traditional delivery services that operate without platform mediation, as well as producers that distribute their products exclusively through their own channels. By clarifying acceptable and prohibited practices, the CPA seeks to strike a balance between innovation and competition enforcement, particularly in a market where platforms often possess strong bargaining power over sellers and service providers. Defining the Relevant Market A cornerstone of the Guideline is the definition of the “Relevant Market”, which is assessed in both product and geographic terms. The relevant product market consists of consumer order delivery services facilitated through smart platforms and applications, while the geographic market is limited to the territory of Kuwait. This definition is critical, as it forms the basis for evaluating whether a platform holds a dominant position and whether certain practices may restrict or distort competition. Horizontal and Coordinated Practices The Guideline reiterates the strict prohibition of horizontal agreements between competing platforms, sellers, or service providers. Such practices include price fixing, market allocation, limitation of production or service capacity, restricting technical development or investment, and bid-rigging. The exchange of sensitive commercial information, such as pricing and customer data, is also considered a serious infringement, even if conducted indirectly. In addition to formal horizontal agreements, the Guideline addresses coordinated practices that may arise without a formal agreement but nonetheless have the effect of restricting or distorting competition. These include parallel conduct, indirect coordination, or practices that facilitate collusion, particularly in data-driven digital markets. The CPA emphasizes that such conduct may fall within the scope of Articles 5 and 6 of the Competition Protection Law, even where no explicit arrangement can be established. Vertical Relationships Between Platforms and Market Participants The Guideline provides detailed guidance on vertical relationships between platforms and product sellers or delivery service providers. While vertical agreements are not prohibited per se, the CPA clarifies that certain practices may infringe the law where they restrict competition or exclude market participants. Key practices of concern include: Resale Price Maintenance: Directly or indirectly setting or imposing minimum resale prices. Most Favoured Nation (MFN) Clauses: Obligating sellers not to offer better prices or conditions on competing platforms or other sales channels. Exclusivity: Imposing an obligation on sellers or service providers not to deal with competing platforms. Discrimination: Applying different commissions or conditions to sellers in similar commercial positions. Self-Preferencing: Granting preferential treatment to the platform's own products or services. Product Bundling: Forcing sellers to purchase additional, unrelated products or services. Unfair Terms: Imposing unfair or commercially unjustified contractual conditions. Dominant Position and Abuse of Market Power Where a platform is found to hold a dominant position, the Guideline subjects its conduct to heightened scrutiny. Dominance is assessed by reference to a range of criteria, including the platform's market share compared to competitors, its order volume and capacity, financial solvency, vertical integration, efficiency of its delivery service, and the existence of barriers to market entry. The negotiation power of those dealing with the platform is also a key consideration. A dominant platform is prohibited from abusing its position in a way that restricts or prevents competition. The Guideline highlights several practices as potential abuses, such as: Predatory Pricing: Selling a service or product below its marginal or average variable cost to exclude competitors. Exclusionary Conduct: Acting to restrict market entry or exclude competitors. Discrimination: Applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties. Refusal to Deal: Refusing to deal with a specific customer according to usual commercial terms without a legitimate reason. Tying: Making the conclusion of a contract conditional on accepting obligations unrelated to the original transaction. Legal Nature of the Guideline From a legal standpoint, it is important to note that the Guideline does not constitute binding legislation in itself. Rather, it serves as an interpretive and regulatory reference reflecting the CPA’s approach to enforcing the Competition Protection Law. Nevertheless, failure to align business practices with the Guideline may be treated as an indicator of potential non-compliance during inspections or investigations conducted by the CPA. Conclusion The CPA's Guideline for the consumer delivery services sector provides important regulatory clarity on the application of Kuwait’s competition law to digital delivery platforms. While it does not create new legal obligations, it offers practical guidance on how competition rules are expected to be applied and enforced in this rapidly evolving market. Platforms, sellers, and service providers operating in this sector are therefore encouraged to review their commercial arrangements and business practices to ensure their alignment with the Guideline, thereby reducing regulatory risk and supporting a competitive and transparent market environment.   Authors: Asad Ahmad, Partner and Head of Anti Trust & Competition and Ahmad Al Buaijan, Trainee Lawyer

On 2 August 2026, the State of Kuwait promulgated Decree-Law No. 78 of 2026 Concerning Combating Commercial Concealment (the "Law"). The Law represents the first standalone legislative instrument in Kuwait to criminalize commercial concealment commonly referred to as "fronting" or hidden ownership arrangements as a distinct criminal offence. The Law shall enter into force six months from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette, anticipated to be approximately February 2027. This legislative development forms part of Kuwait's broader regulatory agenda to enhance the integrity of the business environment, promote transparency, and ensure that investment is channeled through lawful and compliant structures. What Is Commercial Concealment? The Law defines "Commercial Concealment" as enabling any person whether natural or juridical to practice any economic activity that such person is prohibited from practicing pursuant to applicable laws and regulations, whether for their own account or in partnership with others, or circumventing the foreign ownership ratios prescribed by law for the purpose of enabling such persons to engage in economic activities in contravention of applicable legislation.  Notably, "Economic Activity" is defined in broad terms to encompass any commercial, investment, industrial, agricultural, service, or professional activity or any activity of an economic nature — aimed at generating profit and requiring licensing from the competent authorities. The Dual Prohibition: Article 2 of the Law establishes a dual prohibition: Prohibition on unlicensed economic activity no person, whether natural or juridical, may practice any economic activity within the State of Kuwait unless duly licensed in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Prohibition on enabling concealment it is equally prohibited to enable any person to violate the foregoing prohibition through commercial concealment, including by permitting such person to use a trade name, license, commercial register, or any other means Management Liability Article 5 introduces a significant governance dimension by extending criminal liability to the person responsible for the actual management of a juridical person, where it is established that such person had knowledge of the violation, or where the violation occurred as a result of their breach of the duties imposed upon them by their office, or where they contributed to or facilitated its commission.  Furthermore, the juridical person shall be jointly liable for the payment of any financial penalties or compensation awarded where the violation was committed by any of its employees in its name or on its behalf.  This provision places directors, general managers, and officers at direct personal exposure. Whistleblower Incentive Article 9 provides that a non-perpetrator informant shall be granted a financial reward, determined by decision of the competent Minister, provided that such reward shall not exceed ten per cent (10%) of the value of the fines collected, where credible evidence is presented that leads to the discovery of such offences and a final conviction is rendered on the basis thereof. In the event of multiple informants, the reward shall be divided equally among them. This provision creates a meaningful financial incentive for employees, competitors, and business partners to report suspected concealment arrangements. Conclusion Decree-Law No. 78 of 2026 represents a significant legislative milestone in Kuwait's efforts to bring transparency, order, and accountability to its commercial environment. It is not an anti-foreign-investment measure; rather, it establishes a clear regulatory framework that channels investment toward lawful, transparent, and compliant structures. As the Law enters into force in early 2027, businesses and investors operating in Kuwait are strongly advised to conduct a comprehensive review of their ownership structures, agency arrangements, and operational compliance frameworks to ensure full alignment with the new requirements and to capitalize on the compliance window before enforcement commences. Authors: Alex Saleh, Managing Partner and Ahmed AlBuaijan, Associate

The State of Kuwait has enacted Decree-Law No. 148 of 2025, introducing substantial amendments to Law No. 20 of 2014 on Electronic Transactions (the Electronic Transactions Law). The reform broadens the Law’s scope and reinforces the legal recognition of electronic records, documents, signatures, and transactions across civil, commercial, administrative, and personal-status matters. It forms part of Kuwait’s wider digital-governance initiative aimed at enhancing service efficiency and reducing reliance on paper-based procedures. Under the amended framework, electronic instruments now have the same legal and evidentiary effect as their paper equivalents, provided they meet the procedural and technical requirements prescribed by law. The amendment further confirms that electronic contracts, communications, and registers are legally valid and enforceable, removing uncertainty regarding the reliability of digital documentation before courts and administrative bodies. Procedural and Technical Requirements Pursuant to Article (9) of the amended Law, an electronic document or record shall have legal effect if all of the following conditions are satisfied: It is preserved in the form in which it was created, sent, or received, or in a manner that reliably proves the accuracy of its data at the time of creation, sending, or receipt; Its contents are capable of being stored and retrieved at any time; It identifies the creator or sender and specifies the date and time of creation, sending, or receipt; and It is saved in an electronic format pursuant to the conditions and rules established by the competent supervisory authority. Similarly, Article (19) provides that an electronic signature shall be deemed a protected electronic signature if it fulfills the following requirements: The signatory can be clearly identified; The signature is uniquely linked to the signatory; The signature is created using a secure signature tool under the exclusive control of the signatory at the time of signing; and Any alteration to the data associated with the signature or its link to the signatory can be detected. The Executive regulations will further specify the detailed technical controls and standards governing these conditions. Practical Implications In practice, these reforms enable public authorities, financial institutions, and private entities to: Execute and store contracts, notices, and records entirely through electronic means; Transition toward fully digital filing and registration systems; Shorten processing timelines and reduce administrative costs; and Rely on electronic registers established by competent authorities as valid proof of rights and obligations. Compliance Considerations In light of Decree-Law No. 148 of 2025, companies should promptly align their internal practices with the new amendments. Key preparatory steps include: 1. Adopt Secure and Verifiable E-Signature Tools Ensure all e-signature systems satisfy the criteria under Article (19), including signatory identification, exclusive linkage to the signer, control at the time of signing, and tamper-detection capabilities. 2.Implement Reliable Electronic Archiving Systems Establish compliant electronic record-keeping aligned with Article (9), ensuring data accuracy, retrievability, and traceability through standardized metadata, timestamps, and system logs. 3.Update Internal Policies and Templates Revise corporate policies, document templates, and approval workflows to formally recognize the legal validity of electronic records and signatures. Decree-Law No. 148 of 2025 was published in the Official Gazette on 23 October 2025 and entered into force on the date of publication. This measure represents a significant milestone in Kuwait’s legal modernization and its continued shift toward a comprehensive digital transformation of public and private sector processes. Authors: Asad Ahmad, Legal Director and Fahad Al Zouman, Trainee Lawyer

Introduction On 9 August 2026, the Central Bank of Kuwait ("CBK") issued Circular No. 2/105/ addressed to all local banks, investment companies, and finance companies (the “Circular”). The Circular directs that plots of land established on state-owned property shall not be relied upon as collateral against credit facilities or financing operations, and shall not be included among collateral counted for the purposes of meeting regulatory requirements in periodic reports. The Circular further instructs institutions currently holding such collateral to reassess the relevant facilities and consider requiring additional acceptable guarantees. While the Circular's text refers to "plots of land established on state-owned property," based on our discussions with the CBK, the intent of this Circular extends further: it is designed to stop the practice of lenders accepting mortgages over buildings and structures erected on state-owned land by usufruct licensees or lessees. A school of thought had developed among certain market participants that, even though the underlying government land itself could not be mortgaged, a party holding a usufruct or lease who constructed a building on that land could separately pledge the building by way of mortgage. The CBK's Circular is intended to put an end to that practice.  This Law Update examines the implications of the Circular, particularly in the context of project finance and lending to Public-Private Partnership ("PPP") projects in Kuwait, and confirms the continued availability of the commercial premises pledge as an alternative security instrument. Background: The Regulatory Framework The Circular is issued under the CBK's longstanding authority to rationalize and regulate credit policy. Since the issuance of Instructions No. BSB/105/1993, the CBK has maintained a framework requiring banks to ensure the quality and enforceability of collateral supporting their credit portfolios. The CBK has periodically reinforced these requirements, including through Circular No. 2/BS/233/2008 directing banks to enhance collateral submitted by customers against credit facilities. The new Circular adds a categorical exclusion: land situated on state-owned property — and, critically, buildings and structures erected thereon — may no longer be treated as qualifying collateral. This aligns with broader principles under Kuwaiti law, including Article 25 of the Civil Law No. 67 of 1980, as amended (which allocates assets factually or legally dedicated to public utility as immune from attachment) and Article 216 of the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law No. 38 of 1980 (the “CCPL”), which forbids attachment or seizure of private or public assets belonging to the State. However, a gap had emerged in market practice: certain lenders took the position that where a usufruct licensee or lessee constructed buildings on state-owned land at its own expense, those buildings could be separately mortgaged on the basis that they were the licensee's property rather than the State's. The CBK has now moved to close this gap from a regulatory standpoint, making clear that such structures cannot be counted as qualifying collateral regardless of the ownership theory advanced. Implications for PPP and Project Finance For project lenders, the Circular formally codifies from a banking-regulatory perspective what has long been understood as a matter of substantive law under the PPP framework. Under Article 23(1) of Law No. 116 of 2014 (the "PPP Law"), the contracting investor or the project company may not sell or mortgage the land on which the project is established. The Kuwait Authority for Partnership’s PPP Projects Guidelines, prepared pursuant to the PPP Law (the “KAPP Guidelines”), have consistently reiterated that "the Project Company may not sell or mortgage the land on which the project is established, since under Kuwaiti law all land is owned by the State." Accordingly, lenders to PPP projects in Kuwait have never been able to take a mortgage or security interest directly over the project site land. However, outside the PPP context, a number of lenders had accepted mortgages over buildings constructed by usufruct licensees on state land, particularly in connection with industrial plots, commercial developments, and BOT-style arrangements that fall outside the scope of the PPP Law. The rationale was that the building, having been erected at the licensee's cost, constituted the licensee's own asset capable of being separately encumbered. The Circular now makes clear that this practice is no longer acceptable from a prudential standpoint: such buildings will not be counted as qualifying collateral in regulatory reports, and institutions holding such security must seek additional guarantees. For PPP project finance, the practical impact is confirmatory rather than constitutive. The PPP Law already prohibited this structure. But for other categories of project lending, particularly where developers have constructed facilities on land leased from the State under Decree Law No. 105 of 1980 on the State-owned Property System, the impact is significant and may require renegotiation of security packages. The Commercial Premises Pledge Remains Available Crucially, the Circular does not affect the availability of the commercial premises pledge, which remains the principal security, similar to "floating charges" in common law countries, available to project lenders in Kuwait. Under Articles 34 and 40–46 of the Commercial Law issued by Decree-Law No. 68 of 1980, a mortgage over business premises creates a floating charge over the fluctuating movable assets of a commercial establishment. In the PPP context, the business premises mortgage covers tangible and intangible elements including goods, business furniture, industrial machinery, customers, trade name, right to lease, trademarks, patents, licenses, designs, and models. The mortgage is constituted by notarized deed and registered at the Commercial Register of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. Public notaries at the Ministry of Justice have confirmed that they have no objection to registering a business premises mortgage over the assets owned by a project company, even where the project is situated on government land. This is because the commercial premises pledge attaches to the privately-owned movable and intangible assets of the going concern — not to the land itself. It is, in substance, a charge over the project company's commercial enterprise as distinct from the state-owned site. The Broader Security Package The Circular is a timely reminder that project lenders in Kuwait must continue to rely on a bespoke security package tailored to the legal constraints of state land. The typical Kuwaiti PPP security package comprises: (i) share pledges over the consortium holding company's shares in the project company (subject to Higher Committee approval); (ii) assignments over the project company's rights to project revenues; (iii) assignments over project agreements; (iv) pledges over project bank accounts; (v) assignments of project company insurances; and (vi) the commercial premises pledge. Recommended Actions Financial institutions should: Audit existing portfolios to identify any credit facilities where state land plots have been counted as qualifying collateral in periodic CBK reports. Reassess affected facilities and determine whether additional acceptable guarantees are required from relevant borrowers. Confirm documentation for PPP project finance facilities, ensuring that commercial premises pledges are properly notarized and registered, and that the omnibus security agreement clearly distinguishes privately-owned project assets from state-owned assets. Conclusion The Circular closes an important gap between the substantive legal prohibition on encumbering state property and the regulatory treatment of buildings erected thereon as collateral. By targeting the practice of mortgaging structures built on state-owned land by usufruct licensees and lessees, the CBK has made clear that the protection afforded to state property under Article 216 of the CCPL extends, for banking-regulatory purposes, to improvements constructed on that property, regardless of who funded the construction. For PPP project lenders, the Circular confirms established practice: security in Kuwaiti PPP transactions must be structured around the project company's privately-owned assets, contractual rights, and revenue streams — not the land or the buildings affixed to it. For lenders in other sectors (including industrial, commercial, and BOT developments on state land), the Circular necessitates an immediate review of security packages. In all cases, the commercial premises pledge, properly taken over a project company's going concern on government land, remains a valid and registrable security instrument that is not affected by this Circular. Authors: Ashraf Hendi, Partner & Head of Banking and Finance and Maryam Tarek, Associate

On 30 July 2026, Kuwait’s Ministry of Commerce and Industry (“MOCI”) issued Ministerial Decision No. 156 of 2026, amending Ministerial Decision No. 4 of 2023 on procedures for identifying the Ultimate Beneficial Owner (“UBO”). The amendment follows an earlier set of changes introduced by MOCI Resolution No. 16 of 2025 and is the latest in a series of amendments to Kuwait’s UBO framework. While the 2025 amendment expanded the scope of application, tightened the penalty regime, and refined registration data requirements, Decision No. 156 of 2026 is narrower in scope but has immediate operational consequences: it significantly shortens the compliance deadlines within which legal persons must establish, update, and file beneficial ownership information. This update explains what changed, why it matters, and what companies should do now. What Changed Decision No. 156 of 2026 amends three provisions of Ministerial Decision No. 4 of 2023—specifically Item (1) of Articles 8, 9, and 11—by reducing the prescribed compliance timelines from their previous lengths to a uniform 15 days: Beneficial Owner Register (Article 8(1)): A legal person must now establish and populate its UBO register within 15 days of the decision’s implementation date or the date the entity came into existence. Under the prior framework, this deadline was 60 days. The pre-existing obligation to record any change to the register within 15 days of awareness (or presumed awareness) remains unchanged. Nominee Board Member Notification (Article 9(1)): A director or board member acting in a nominee capacity must notify the legal person of that status within 15 days of acquiring the capacity, a deadline that was already in place under the original framework. Existing nominee board members (those holding the capacity prior to publication of the decision) must likewise notify within 15 days of publication. The prior notification window for existing nominees was 30 days — this is the only change made by Decision 156/2026 to Article 9(1). Filing with the Registrar (Article 11(1)): A legal person must submit its UBO register data and register of partners or shareholders to the registrar within 15 days of the decision’s implementation date or from the date of licensing and registration. The previous deadline was 60 days. Entities must also take reasonable measures to safeguard their records from damage, loss, or destruction. Why the Change Matters The tightening of deadlines should be read in the context of Kuwait’s broader transparency and AML/CFT agenda. The original 2023 UBO framework was introduced to meet international standards—particularly Financial Action Task Force (FATF) recommendations—requiring jurisdictions to ensure that competent authorities have timely access to adequate and accurate beneficial ownership information. The 2025 amendment escalated enforcement, introducing administrative fines of KD 1,000 to KD 10,000 per violation, registration suspension for up to three months, and the possibility of court-ordered deletion from the Commercial Register for sustained non-compliance. It also conditioned license grant or renewal on UBO compliance. Decision No. 156 of 2026 completes this trajectory by compressing the time within which ownership and control information must reach the public register. A 60-day window allowed entities significant latitude to delay—or structure around—filing obligations. Reducing this to 15 days aligns Kuwait’s framework more closely with international best practice, where real-time or near-real-time beneficial ownership disclosure is increasingly the expectation. Practical Impact Newly formed entities: any company registered or licensed after the decision’s effective date must submit complete UBO data to the registrar within 15 days of formation. This effectively makes UBO filing a near-immediate post-incorporation step, comparable in urgency to commercial register entry itself. Ongoing change management: the 15-day rolling update obligation means that any share transfer, change of control, restructuring, death of an owner, or new nominee arrangement must be reflected in the UBO register and filed with the registrar within 15 days. Companies must build internal processes to capture these events promptly. Nominee directors: the compressed notification window puts immediate pressure on nominee board members to formalize their status. In practice, this also means that legal persons must have a mechanism to receive, acknowledge, and file nominee notifications rapidly. M&A and investment transactions: acquirers, investors, and lenders should factor UBO filing timelines into transaction planning. A completion or closing that changes beneficial ownership triggers a 15-day clock—due diligence checklists and condition-precedent schedules should account for this. Penalty exposure: the shorter deadline increases the risk of inadvertent non-compliance. With administrative fines of up to KD 10,000 per violation, registration suspension, and the potential for license non-renewal already in place (per the 2025 amendment), the cost of missing the new 15-day window is material. Recommended Next Steps We recommend that companies, investors, and advisors take the following actions: Audit current UBO registers: confirm that all beneficial ownership data is complete, accurate, and filed with the registrar. Treat the decision as a reset point. Establish internal notification protocols: ensure that share transfers, board changes, nominee appointments, and control shifts are flagged to compliance officers within days—not weeks—of occurrence. Update transaction playbooks: for M&A, joint ventures, and financing transactions, build the 15-day UBO filing into post-closing action lists and designate responsibility for timely submission. Brief boards and managers: directors and senior managers are the natural compliance owners. They should understand the compressed timelines and their personal exposure under the framework. Monitor further MOCI guidance: the decision took effect immediately upon issuance. Further implementing instructions or clarifications from MOCI may follow and should be tracked. Conclusion Ministerial Decision No. 156 of 2026 is procedural in form but operational in effect. It does not change who qualifies as a UBO, what information must be disclosed, or what penalties apply—but it materially changes how quickly that information must reach the register. For companies with clean records, the impact is manageable. For those with outdated filings, undisclosed nominee arrangements, or pending ownership changes, the 15-day window leaves little room for delay. We encourage market participants to treat this amendment as a compliance trigger and to act promptly. For assistance with UBO compliance, corporate restructuring, or transaction planning in light of Decision No. 156 of 2026, please contact our Kuwait office. Authors: Alex Saleh, Managing Partner and Fahad Alzouman, Trainee Lawyer

Introduction: As part of ongoing efforts to enhance regulatory efficiency and transparency the “Competition Protection Agency” “CPA” has issued Decision No. (40) of 2026, establishing a comprehensive schedule of fees applicable to services provided by the authority. This development reflects a broader regulatory approach aimed at organizing procedural mechanisms, improving service delivery, and reinforcing the operational framework governing competition law in the State of Kuwait. The Decision introduces a structured fee regime covering a range of services, including applications, objections, complaints and requests submitted before the authority. It also formally repeals Decision No.(24) of 2021, signaling a transition toward an updated and more refined regulatory model that aligns with the evolving needs Legal basis and regulatory context   The issuance of this decision falls within the authority’s mandate under Kuwait’s competition law framework, which empowers it to regulate procedures relating to economic concentration, anti-competitave practices and market oversight. The introduction of service fees serves not only as an administrative measure but also as a tool to ensure procedural discipline and resource allocation within the authority By formalizing the costs associated with regulatory services, this decision contributes in improving predictability and transparency for market participants engaging with the authority. Key features of the fee framework The new decision sets out specific fees for a number of core regulatory services. Notably, it imposes a fee of 5,000KD for submitting an application for exemption, reflecting the significance and complexity of such requests. In addition, a fee of 500KD is applicable for filing objections related to economic concentration application, The framework also includes a fee of 100KD for submitting complaints, thereby facilitating access to the authority while maintaining a structured submission process. Further fees are imposed such as fees in relation to obtaining a copy of documents related to the violation referred to the disciplinary council, for each document not exceeding 10 pages an additional 500 fils is charged for each extra page when obtaining a copy of the documents. Also, a fee of 200 KD is imposed for submitting an appeal before the disciplinary council against decisions issued by the council.   These fees collectively establish a balanced system that ensures accessibility while reinforcing the seriousness and credibility of submissions made to the authority. Service: Fee (KWD) Application for exemption: 5,000 Objection related to economic concentration: 500 Submitting a complaint: 100 Request to view and obtain a copy of documents related to the violation referred to the disciplinary council: 10 Submitting an appeal before the disciplinary council against decisions issued by the council: 200 Conclusion Decision No. (40) of 2026 represents a significant step toward strengthening the institutional framework of competition regulation in Kuwait. By introducing a clear and structured fee regime, the authority reinforces transparency, procedural, clarity, and regulatory discipline. Market participants are therefore encouraged to familiarize themselves with the new framework and incorporate its requirements into their practices ensuring efficient and informed engagement with the authority. Feel free to reach out to our Head of Antitrust & Competition Asad Ahmad, if you have any questions at [email protected] Authors: Asad Ahmad, Head of Antitrust & Competition and Ahmed Al Buaijan, Trainee Lawyer

Kuwait is taking a major step toward strengthening the integrity of its financial system with the announced establishment of a specialized Public Prosecution for Banking Affairs, which is expected to commence operations in 2026. The proposal, announced by the Public Prosecutor, shows Kuwait’s ongoing efforts to strengthen protection of the banking sector and respond to the rapid growth of financial crimes driven by digital transformation. The newly established prosecution will function as a specialized body dedicated to investigating and prosecuting banking related crimes. Its duty will cover a range of financial offenses, with particular focus on electronic fraud, forgery, and the issuance of cheques without sufficient funds. These offenses have become increasingly common alongside the growth of electronic banking and digital payment systems, the fact that makes specialized oversight and enforcement a regulatory necessity. The Public Prosecutor emphasized that accelerating financial developments have created an urgent need for an advanced institutional response capable of safeguarding confidence in banking transactions. The new prosecution is expected to contribute to this objective by strengthening enforcement mechanisms and improving the efficiency of legal procedures related to banking crimes. This development represents a shift toward more specialized prosecution functions within Kuwait’s criminal justice system. Selection of Prosecutors assigned to the Banking Affairs Prosecution will be based on objective criteria, including professional experience and technical competence. The goal is to establish a highly capable prosecuting framework equipped to address the nature of financial crimes with its continuous evolving in both scale and complexity. For the first time, the new prosecution will also assume responsibility for preparing analytical studies and periodic reports aimed at monitoring patterns and methods of banking related crimes. These reports are expected to support proactive crime prevention strategies and position the prosecution as a key reference for data and analysis in this field. In parallel, the prosecution will play a vital role in public legal awareness. Where necessary, it will launch legal awareness programs targeting institutions and individuals to enhance understanding of digital crime. Overall, the establishment of the Public Prosecution for Banking Affairs represents an important milestone in reinforcing Kuwait’s financial security framework through enhancing oversight, improving enforcement capabilities, and promoting preventive awareness. This initiative supports economic stability and contributes to a safer and more resilient financial environment to individuals and the national economy. Authors: Ashraf Hendi, Partner and Ahmed Al Buaijan, Trainee Lawyer

In line with Kuwait’s vision to develop its real estate investment environment and regulate non-Kuwaiti participation in this vital sector, Decree No. 195 of 2025 (the “Decree”) was issued to strike a balance between attracting foreign investment while safeguarding the exclusivity of private housing for Kuwaiti nationals and maintaining consistency with the existing legal framework governing non-Kuwaiti ownership. The Decree, while operates alongside Decree No. 74 of 1979 on non-Kuwaiti ownership of real estate, sets out the following provisions: Eligibility and Conditions For Real Estate Ownership (Article 1): In compliance with Decree-Law No. 74 of 1979 on Non-Kuwaiti Real Estate Ownership, companies with non-Kuwaiti partners and which are listed on licensed stock exchanges in Kuwait, as well as real estate funds and investment portfolios licensed by the competent Kuwaiti authorities, may own real estate, subject to the following conditions: One of the activities of such companies, real estate funds, or investment portfolios must include dealing in real estate. The Decree imposes a categorical prohibition on owning or dealing of real estate, plots, or lands designated for private housing purposes regardless of location or project. Exceptions and Equal Treatment (Article 2) The provisions of this Decree expressly preserve two key points: The right of entities under the supervision of the Central Bank of Kuwait or the supervision of other regulatory bodies to own real estate in accordance with the law. The treatment of nationals of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member states shall be treated the same as Kuwaiti citizens with respect to the ownership of land and constructed properties in Kuwait, in accordance with the law. Implementation and Entry into Force (Article 3): Ministers, each within their respective jurisdictions, shall implement this Decree, which shall take effect upon its publication in the Official Gazette. Market participants should, therefore, align internal policies, funds documentation, and transaction screening protocols to ensure compliance with the Decree from the date of publication. As outlined above, Decree No. 195 of 2025 aims to preserve the exclusivity of residential housing for citizens and prevent practices that could disrupt the national real estate market, while clearly ring-fencing the private housing segment for citizens and preserving supervisory and GCC equal-treatment frameworks. In parallel, it promotes sustainable investment within the real estate sector, while remaining consistent with existing laws governing the ownership of property by non-Kuwaitis.. The result is a more defined pathway for non-Kuwaiti capital that aligns with Kuwait’s policy objectives and market stability. Authors: May El Mahdy, Senior Associate and Maha Abdullah, Trainee Lawyer

Introduction The rapid growth of digital food delivery platforms in Kuwait has transformed consumer behaviour and reshaped the relationship between restaurants, delivery services, and consumers. Recognizing the need for regulatory oversight in this evolving sector, the Ministry of Commerce and Industry issued Ministerial Decision No. 10 of 2026, establishing a comprehensive framework governing food delivery platform and their commercial relationships. This article examines the key provisions of the Ministerial Decision, its alignment with Kuwait's competition law framework, and the practical compliance steps that platform operators must consider. Scope and Application The Ministerial Decision applies to service providers operating electronic platforms-whether mobile applications or websites-that facilitate the ordering of ready-made foods from licensed establishments, including restaurants, cafés, bakeries, and juice shops. The regulation governs the tripartite relationship between platforms, restaurants (referred to as "clients"), and consumers, establishing obligations for each party while designating the platform as the central point of accountability. Notably, the regulation does not apply to retail or wholesale food trade, cooperative societies, pharmacies, or establishments that are not engaged in preparing foods ready for direct consumption. This targeted scope ensures that the regulation addresses the specific dynamics and competition concerns arising in the digital intermediary market. Alignment with Competition Law No. 72 of 2020 The Ministerial Decision is explicitly designed to complement and reinforce Kuwait's Competition Protection Law No. 72 of 2020, which prohibits anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant position, and practices that distort free competition. Several provisions of the Ministerial Decision directly implement principles established under the Competition Law and the Competition Protection Agency's Guideline Manual for the Consumer Delivery Services Sector. First, the prohibition on exclusive dealing arrangements under Article 4(7) of the Ministerial Decision addresses concerns about vertical restraints that could foreclose market access. Under Article 7 of the Competition Law, vertical agreements that restrict or prevent competition are prohibited. The Guideline Manual specifically identifies exclusive contracts-where platforms require restaurants not to deal with competitors-as a potentially anti-competitive practice. By declaring any exclusivity clause void, the Ministerial Decision ensures that restaurants retain the freedom to list on multiple platforms, thereby preserving competitive market dynamics. Second, the prohibition on unjustified refusal to contract under Article 3(8) directly addresses abuse of dominant position concerns. Article 8 of the Competition Law prohibits dominant firms from engaging in practices that prevent or restrict competition, and the Guideline Manual identifies unjustified refusal to deal as an example of such abuse. The Ministerial Decision requires platforms to provide legitimate, objective, and disclosed justifications for any refusal to contract or termination of a commercial relationship, preventing arbitrary exclusion of market participants. Third, the regulation's anti-discrimination provisions align with the Guideline Manual's identification of discriminatory treatment as an abuse of dominant position. Platforms are prohibited from using algorithms or technical mechanisms to favor certain restaurants, and promotional offers must be made available equally to all clients or similar categories. These provisions address concerns specific to digital markets, where platform operators may leverage their intermediary position to preference affiliated or favored businesses. Fourth, the transparency and fee disclosure requirements operationalize the Guideline Manual's emphasis on transparency in commercial dealings. Platforms must submit their complete fee schedules to the Ministry annually, and all fees must be documented in written contracts. The three-year fee freeze provision further protects restaurants from unexpected cost increases, though platforms retain the ability to compete by offering lower fees. The Role of the Guideline Manual The Competition Protection Agency's Guideline Manual for the Consumer Delivery Services Sector serves as a bridge between the Competition Law and the Ministerial Decision. The Manual identifies specific practices of concern in the delivery platform market, including predatory pricing, most-favored-nation clauses, self-preferencing, and product bundling. The Ministerial Decision transforms many of these concerns into binding regulatory requirements, creating a sector-specific compliance framework that supplements the general prohibitions of the Competition Law. Importantly, Article 3(7) of the Ministerial Decision explicitly requires platforms to comply with the Guideline Manual, elevating its status from advisory guidance to a mandatory compliance standard. This integration ensures regulatory coherence and provides platforms with clear direction on expected conduct. Consumer Protection Dimensions While primarily focused on competition and commercial relationships, the Ministerial Decision also incorporates significant consumer protection measures. Platforms are designated as guarantors to consumers for order fulfillment, obligated to compensate consumers for any deficiencies within seven working days. This liability allocation simplifies consumer recourse while preserving the platform's right to seek reimbursement from the responsible party. Additionally, platforms must maintain transparent pricing, clear cancellation policies, accessible customer service, and a robust complaints system. These requirements align with Consumer Protection Law No. 39 of 2014 and ensure that competition in the market ultimately serves consumer welfare. Compliance Considerations for Platform Operators Digital delivery platforms operating in Kuwait should undertake several steps to ensure compliance with the new regulatory framework. First, operators should conduct a comprehensive review of existing contracts with restaurants to identify and remove any exclusivity clauses, undisclosed fees, or terms that may conflict with the regulation. All commercial terms must be documented in written agreements signed by both parties. Second, platforms should establish internal processes to ensure timely submission of annual fee schedules to the Ministry and to track the three-year fee lock periods for each client relationship. Systems should be implemented to prevent unauthorized fee increases during the lock period. Third, operators should review their algorithms and technical systems to ensure that ranking, display, and promotional mechanisms do not create unjustified preferences among restaurants. Documentation of objective criteria used in any differentiation will be essential for demonstrating compliance. Fourth, platforms should establish procedures for responding to restaurant data requests within the mandated one-week timeframe and ensure that consumer and commercial data is handled in accordance with confidentiality requirements. Finally, operators should implement a compliant complaints system that enables electronic submission, tracking, and resolution of complaints, with records retained for at least six months. Conclusion Ministerial Decision No. 10 of 2026 represents a significant regulatory development for Kuwait's digital food delivery sector, establishing clear rules that promote fair competition, protect restaurants from exploitative practices, and safeguard consumer interests. By aligning closely with Competition Law No. 72 of 2020 and the Competition Protection Agency's Guideline Manual, the regulation creates a coherent framework that addresses the unique competition challenges of digital platform markets. Platform operators should act promptly to review their practices and implement necessary compliance measures to avoid warnings, administrative closure, license cancellation, or financial penalties under the applicable laws. Authors: Asad Ahmad, Partner and Head of Antitrust & Competition

Kuwait is positioning itself as a leading regional jurisdiction in integrating artificial intelligence and cloud into the digital economy.   Government‑backed collaborations with Microsoft and Google have been announced to advance AI‑enabled cloud capabilities and deploy productivity solutions across public agencies, Supported by Vision 2035 and potential participation by Kuwait’s sovereign ecosystem in global digital infrastructure initiatives, these developments signal a material step toward embedding AI across the nation. This transformation, however, is not being driven by technology alone. Kuwait’s expanding digital ecosystem is developing within a sophisticated legal and institutional framework that governs data protection, cloud computing, and cybersecurity.  For AI vendors and cloud service providers, understanding this framework is essential not only as a matter of compliance but as a prerequisite for market participation.  These institutional foundations are evolving toward a more coordinated governance model under Kuwait’s forthcoming National AI Strategy, which is expected to align the roles of existing regulators and establish a unified national framework for AI oversight and data governance. Institutional architecture: CAIT, CITRA, and the National Cybersecurity Center At the core of this structure stand three institutions that define Kuwait’s digital governance model.  The Central Agency for Information Technology, known as “CAIT,” leads governmental digital transformation and supports the development of national cloud infrastructure and AI adoption across public entities.  Working alongside CAIT is the Communications and Information Technology Regulatory Authority, or “CITRA,” established under Law No. 37 of 2014 to regulate the telecommunications and information technology sectors, license operators, and oversee privacy and cloud compliance through instruments including the Data Privacy Protection Regulation and the Cloud Computing Regulatory Framework.  Complementing both agencies is the National Cybersecurity Center, created by Decision No. 37 of 2022, which serves as Kuwait’s authority for cybersecurity and data‑classification oversight and sets parameters for cross‑border processing of sensitive information. “Taken together, these bodies form a layered governance model.  CITRA’s licensing and cloud rules establish the baseline for service provision and customer protections, while the National Cybersecurity Center’s classification and cross‑border controls determine where sensitive workloads may reside. CAIT’s digital transformation mandate then operationalizes these standards across the public sector, ensuring that modernization initiatives are designed around compliance from inception rather than retrofitted post‑deployment. ” Programs and partnerships: from policy to implementation Recent initiatives demonstrate how these institutions coordinate to align technological development with regulatory oversight. In cooperation with Microsoft, CAIT and CITRA have announced and begun implementing a national program that includes the planned establishment of  AI‑enabled data center capabilities, an integrated AI system, a center for cloud auditing, and a facility dedicated to advancing the digital infrastructure within the public sector.  CAIT oversees execution across government entities, while CITRA ensures that the deployment of cloud and AI environments remains consistent with Kuwait’s data‑governance, cybersecurity, and localization requirements. The initiative includes large‑scale training programs in cybersecurity and artificial intelligence, embedding compliance and institutional capability within the government’s transformation framework. “For both vendors and government entities, successful execution hinges on translating these high‑level initiatives into contractually enforceable obligations.  Agreements should embed data residency commitments tied to approved classifications, encryption and key management aligned to supervisory expectations, audit and inspection cooperation mechanisms, and incident workflows that meet statutory notification thresholds.  This contractual scaffolding is how Kuwait’s compliance requirements are made real in day‑to‑day operations.” Data governance pillars: privacy, localization, and cloud compliance CITRA’s regulatory reach extends beyond traditional telecommunications providers to include any entity offering communications or IT services in Kuwait, including cloud platforms, application developers, and AI‑based service providers that process user data.  The Cloud Computing Regulatory Framework requires providers to obtain authorization before operating, comply with technical and security standards, and commit to service‑level and continuity obligations through transparent contractual terms.  It also sets clear rules on data transfers, encryption, and customer exit rights to ensure that information remains protected throughout the term of a service. Meanwhile, the Cybersecurity Center requires organizations handling electronic information to implement internal data classification processes that it reviews and approves, and to obtain authorization before storing or processing sensitive information outside Kuwait.  Together, these requirements  create a comprehensive data‑governance system, ensuring that information flows remain traceable, accountable, and primarily local. The Data Privacy Protection Regulation sets out the main principles governing data processing in Kuwait.  Processing activities must rely on a lawful basis such as consent, legal obligation, or necessity.  Service providers must publish privacy notices in both Arabic and English that clearly explain the purpose of collection, retention periods, and data transfer practices.  Additional protections apply to minors under eighteen, who require guardian consent, while users retain the right to access, correct, erase, or object to the processing of their data.  Marketing communications must include opt‑out mechanisms, and any third‑party or affiliate marketing requires prior consent from the data subject. Data localization requirements apply in defined contexts, including where instruments require classification, encryption, and approvals tied to sensitivity and sectoral scope; organizations should confirm whether obligations arise under statute, regulation, license conditions, or supervisory circulars.  Organizations must classify and encrypt data both in transit and at rest, and in certain cases must notify or obtain authorization from the competent authority before cross‑border transfers.  Sensitive data may only be processed outside Kuwait where the National Cybersecurity Center grants prior approval under applicable classification and cross‑border rules.  Under the Cloud Framework, providers must also maintain exit procedures and data deletion mechanisms to prevent vendor lock‑in and ensure the secure return or destruction of customer data upon termination. Beyond localization, the framework expects a program of security governance.  Entities may be required to or are expected to appoint a data protection officer, conduct regular audits and penetration tests, and maintain business continuity and disaster recovery plans as required or expected under the governing instrument.  Breach reporting is governed by defined timelines, with major incidents often notified within twenty‑four hours for major incidents and seventy‑two hours for other reportable breaches.  These timelines reflect Kuwait’s emphasis on prompt response and transparency in handling cyber incidents. “Organizations face a practical design choice: fully localize sensitive datasets, adopt hybrid architectures that segment workloads and apply strong pseudonymization techniques, or deploy sovereign models with customer‑managed keys. Each path carries different approval, audit, and continuity implications. Early engagement on data classification—paired with architecture diagrams and control evidence—can materially shorten authorization timelines and reduce rework.” Enforcement and supervisory expectations Enforcement under this framework is robust and signals the seriousness of Kuwait’s commitment to compliance.  CITRA retains wide supervisory powers, including the authority to order the blocking of networks,  require the removal of unlawful content, and enforce confidentiality obligations.  Non‑compliance can result in administrative fines reaching up to one million Kuwaiti dinars for each violation up to applicable statutory or regulatory caps.  In severe cases, authorities may suspend or cancel an operator’s or provider’s authorization and refer breaches involving unauthorized disclosure or interception of communications to criminal prosecution.  Entities may also be required to implement remedial measures following inspection or compensate affected users. CITRA’s supervisory toolkit, combining licensing leverage, inspection rights, and administrative penalties—creates concrete incentives for robust control environments.  Entities that maintain a tested incident response plan calibrated to 24/72‑hour reporting thresholds, document periodic control assessments (including penetration testing where required), and retain traceable audit artifacts typically encounter fewer remedial directives following inspection. Contracting and operational implications The strategic partnerships with Microsoft and Google illustrate how legal compliance now shapes every stage of Kuwait’s cloud and digital Cross‑border collaborations must reconcile innovation with the country’s strong commitment to data sovereignty.  Agreements increasingly address data controller and processor responsibilities, localization and encryption requirements, breach notification obligations aligned with statutory timelines, and provisions ensuring compliance with CITRA’s audit, inspection, and termination requirements. In practice, legal compliance has become a central component of contractual design rather than a post‑signing consideration. “For technology providers and regulated customers, key contractual provisions typically scrutinized in Kuwait include: (i) data residency and classification‑tied processing covenants; (ii) encryption standards and key‑management models (including customer‑managed keys where applicable); (iii) audit, inspection, and logging transparency; (iv) incident notification aligned to statutory thresholds; and (v) exit, portability, and secure deletion mechanics.  Well‑designed clauses should be accompanied by operational runbooks to ensure obligations are practicably deliverable at scale. ” National AI Strategy: trajectory and scope Kuwait’s broader digital economy stands at the intersection of rapid digitalization and rigorous legal oversight.  The country’s dual focus on innovation and accountability distinguishes it within the region and offers a model for the responsible integration of artificial intelligence within critical national infrastructure.  As the legal framework continues to mature, companies that engage early and align their internal processes with these requirements will not only mitigate risk but play a defining role in shaping the next phase of Kuwait’s digital economy. Kuwait’s forthcoming National AI Strategy is expected to provide a policy framework that complements these legal and regulatory developments.  The draft strategy proposes establishing a High‑Level Steering Committee, a cross‑sectoral body bringing together senior representatives from CAIT, CITRA, the National Cybersecurity Center, key ministries, academia, and private‑sector partners.  The committee’s objective is to coordinate national AI initiatives and ensure alignment between regulation, infrastructure, and innovation.  The strategy also proposes AI safety frameworks (including safety brakes for critical infrastructure) and a shared‑responsibility model that defines the respective roles of regulators and technology providers in safeguarding AI systems and data.  Aligned with Vision 2035, the strategy calls for strengthening Kuwait’s data and digital foundations through centralized repositories, standardized governance policies, and cybersecurity baselines, enabling responsible AI deployment across sectors such as healthcare, education, energy, and public safety. “Kuwait’s trajectory places it among the region’s more sovereignty‑forward jurisdictions, prioritizing local control, auditability, and public‑sector modernization. For market entrants, the decisive differentiator will be governance maturity: the ability to evidence compliance‑by‑design in architecture, contracts, and operations. Those that internalize this model will mitigate regulatory risk and gain a competitive edge in public‑sector and critical‑infrastructure procurement.” Conclusion Taken together, these measures signal that Kuwait’s data‑localization and cloud‑compliance regimes are part of a wider national effort to embed trust, accountability, and resilience at the core of its AI‑driven digital transformation.  As Kuwait advances from regulatory enforcement to strategic execution, its ability to align law, policy, and innovation will determine how effectively it leads the next wave of AI governance in the region. Authors: Asad Ahmad, Head of Anti-Trust & Competition Fahad Alzouman, Trainee Lawyer.

Key Amendments Introduced by Resolution No. 37 of 2026 The Resolution amends Article 17 of Ministerial Resolution No. 4 of 2023 in three material respects: A. Beneficial Ownership Disclosure as a Mandatory Licensing Condition Under the revised Article 17, no commercial license may be issued or renewed unless full compliance with beneficial ownership disclosure requirements is demonstrated. While the previous iteration of Article 17 contained a similar prohibition, the amended provision clearly reinforces beneficial ownership compliance as an absolute, non-negotiable precondition to licensing, effectively elevating it from a mere routine filing requirement to a critical gatekeeper to market access and continued commercial operations. B. Administrative Penalties The Resolution introduces administrative fines ranging from a minimum of KWD 1,000 to a maximum of KWD 10,000 per violation. These penalties apply in circumstances where a legal person fails to disclose its beneficial owner(s) or submits incorrect or misleading information in connection with its beneficial ownership declarations. C. Expanded Scope of Personal Liability Crucially, the Resolution extends the same penalty regime to any natural person who is knowingly registered as a beneficial owner on an incorrect basis, as well as to any party who participates - in any manner - in providing or submitting information to the competent authorities that such party knows to be inaccurate. This provision significantly expands the enforcement perimeter, capturing not only the disclosing entity but also individuals and third parties complicit in supplying false data. Practical Implications for Businesses The Resolution carries immediate and tangible consequences for businesses operating in Kuwait. Given that beneficial ownership compliance is now an express condition for licensing and renewal, any entity that has not submitted or has submitted incomplete or inaccurate) beneficial ownership disclosures risks being unable to obtain or renew its commercial license, thereby facing potential operational disruption and regulatory exposure. Moreover, the extension of personal liability toknowingly non-compliant individuals broadens the risk profile beyond corporate officers and shareholders to potentially include advisers, agents, or nominees involved in the preparation or submission of beneficial ownership declarations. Entities should therefore review not only their own internal records but also the accuracy of information provided by third-party nominees or agents acting on their behalf. The existing framework under Resolution No. 4 of 2023 already requires legal persons to update their beneficial ownership registers within fifteen days of becoming aware of any changein beneficial ownership, and to submit those updates to the MOCI upon incorporation, renewal, or any structural modification. The new Resolution’s heightened enforcement posture underscores the importance of maintaining timely and accurate records. Recommended Compliance Steps In light of the Resolution and the broader obligations under Ministerial Resolution No. 4 of 2023 (as amended), businesses should consider taking the following immediate actions: Conduct a comprehensive reviewof your current beneficial ownership register to ensure all individuals exercise direct or indirect control, including through chains of ownership or other means, are accurately identified and disclosed. Verify that all previous disclosuressubmitted to the MOCI remain current and accurate and file any necessary updates via the MOCI portal without delay. Review the roles and responsibilitiesof any individuals registered as beneficial owners, nominees, or agents to confirm that their registration accurately reflects the underlying ownership and control structure. Implement internal controls and periodic review mechanisms to ensure ongoing compliance and prompt notification of any future changes. Conclusion Ministerial Resolution No. 37 of 2026 sends a clear signal: Kuwait intends to enforce beneficial ownership transparency with increasing rigor. The combination of licensing conditionality, escalating financial penalties, and expanded personal liability creates a compliance environment where delayed or incomplete disclosure carries commercial and individual risk. Businesses operating in Kuwait are strongly encouraged to take proactive, timely steps to ensure full compliance ahead of any licensing or renewal applications. Authors: Mohamed Abdelhamed, Legal Director and Maryam Tarek, Associate

This year, Kuwait’s merger control regime has been reshaped by legislative reforms and constitutional challenges. The framework now requires close attention to the scope of notifiable transactions, the financial thresholds that trigger a filing obligation, and the exemptions designed to exclude routine restructurings. Parties must also navigate detailed notification requirements, supporting documentation, filing fees, and a multi-stage review before the Kuwait Competition Protection Agency (“CPA”). Recent constitutional rulings—most notably the 2025 decision striking down the CPA’s power to impose revenue-based fines—have added a new dimension to enforcement and signal further reform on the horizon. Merger control in Kuwait is governed by Law No. 72 of 2020 on the Protection of Competition and its Implementing Regulations, issued under Resolution No. 14 of 2021 and amended by Decree No. 25 of 2022. Together, they establish the CPA, prohibit anti-competitive practices, and set out merger control obligations, review procedures, and exemptions. This overview walks through the scope of notifiable transactions, the financial thresholds that trigger notification, and carve-outs for routine restructurings, before outlining the notification process, documentation, and filing fees. We then explain the CPA’s multi-stage review and monitoring practices and concludes with constitutional developments—particularly the ruling that limited the CPA’s power to impose revenue-based fines—and their implications for enforcement and legislative reform. A merger control filing with the CPA is required when a transaction (i) qualifies as an economic concentration. Under the Competition Law, an economic concentration includes mergers, acquisitions of control, and joint ventures that create an autonomous economic entity. In the event a transaction is considered an economic concentration, then the financial thresholds must be analysed. The obligation to notify the CPA is triggered when certain financial thresholds are met, based on the audited financial statements of the preceding fiscal year. Specifically, notification is required if any of the following financial thresholds are met (“Financial Thresholds”): One party to the concentration generates revenues in Kuwait exceeding KWD 500,000; The aggregate revenues of all parties exceed KWD 750,000; OR The registered assets of the parties in Kuwait exceed KWD 2.5 million. The Competition Law provides several exemptions to ensure that routine transactions are not unnecessarily subjected to merger control filings. These exemptions include acquisitions by banks, insurance companies, and financial institutions engaged in securities trading, provided they do not exercise substantive voting rights and dispose of the securities within one year of acquisition. The disposal period may be extended by the CPA upon a justified request demonstrating that disposal was not reasonably practicable within the one-year period. Exemptions also apply to acquisitions arising from insolvency, defaults, debt restructuring, or settlements with creditors are excluded, as are intra-group restructurings within the same economic group. These carve-outs reflect the legislature’s intent to capture only those transactions that materially affect market structure and competition in Kuwait. Parties must notify the CPA within 60 days of signing the transaction agreement or related contract. However, in practice, the CPA does not strictly enforce this 60-day requirement. A binding agreement is not strictly required before notification; it is sufficient for parties to file based on a letter of intent, memorandum of understanding, or a good faith intention to reach an agreement. The merger control notification must include detailed corporate documents, financial statements, transaction agreements, market share data, competitor information, and an economic report addressing the potential effects on competition in the relevant market. The filing fee is 0.1% of the combined paid-up capital or Kuwaiti assets of the parties, whichever is less, capped at KWD 100,000, with a minimum charge above zero. The review process before the CPA involves several steps. Once a filing is submitted, the CPA chairman has five days to refer the application to the executive director for review. The executive director then conducts a substantive examination of the transaction, which must be completed within 90 days. This period may be extended if additional information is required or if third-party objections are raised. After the executive director’s assessment, the matter is referred to the CPA’s board of directors, which must issue a decision within 30 days on whether to approve, conditionally approve, or reject the transaction. The parties must be formally notified of the board’s decision within 15 days, ensuring transparency and closure of the review process. In practice, clearance typically takes around 45–60 calendar days from the time a complete application is submitted, though delays are common if filings are incomplete or contested. Importantly, transactions cannot be implemented before clearance; violations can result in fines or orders to unwind the transaction. These include fines of up to 10% of total revenues for failing to notify an economic concentration or for submitting misleading or incorrect filings, and the same ceiling for anti-competitive agreements or abuse of dominance. Lesser violations—such as obstructing CPA investigations, failing to comply with obligations after notice, or providing misleading information—carry fines of up to 1% of revenues from the previous fiscal year. In parallel with these sanctioning powers, the CPA has a designated department tasked with reviewing transactions published on social media platforms to ensure that any notifiable transactions, which have not submitted a merger control filing, are investigated and then referred to the CPA disciplinary board. The CPA has sent investigatory letters to both local and foreign parties requesting information and details surrounding published transactions they are involved in. GLA has played a key role in moulding the Kuwait merger control landscape. In February 2025, GLA successfully represented a client facing significant CPA sanctions.  In a landmark ruling by the Kuwaiti Constitutional Court, which significantly altered the CPA enforcement capabilities. The Court declared Paragraph (1) of Article 34 of Law No. 72 of 2020 unconstitutional. This provision had empowered the CPA’s disciplinary board to impose financial penalties of up to 10% of a party’s total revenues for violations of Articles 5–8 (anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominance). The challenge, successfully argued by GLA & Company Senior Partner, Nader Al Awadhi, on behalf of the Union of Cooperative Societies, was based on constitutional principles, including: Violation of due process and judicial oversight (penalties were imposed administratively, not judicially); Lack of proportionality between penalties and violations; and Encroachment on protections of private ownership and personal liberty. The ruling curtails the CPA’s ability to impose revenue-based fines and raises questions about the validity of past sanctions. Going forward, merger control enforcement will likely need to rely on judicially supervised remedies or amended legislative provisions consistent with constitutional safeguards. Further, by establishing constitutional precedent, the ruling has already influenced subsequent cases, including one that struck down the 1% fine for non-compliance as unconstitutional, and has intensified calls for legislative reform. As a result, draft amendments to the Competition Law have been introduced and are currently awaiting approval. .Kuwait’s merger control regime features relatively low financial thresholds that capture both domestic and cross-border transactions. Parties must prepare comprehensive filings and anticipate a few rounds of queries within the review period. However, the Constitutional Court’s ruling striking down the CPA’s power to impose steep turnover-based fines introduces a new layer of legal complexity. Companies engaging in mergers and acquisitions in Kuwait should closely monitor forthcoming legislative or regulatory adjustments as the state reconciles the Competition Law framework with constitutional requirements. Authors: Asad Ahmad, Head of Anti-Trust & Competition and Fahad Al Zouman, Trainee Lawyer.

The International Chamber of Commerce ("ICC") has approved a revised version of its Rules of Arbitration, which will enter into force on 1 June 2026 (the "2026 ICC Rules"), replacing the 2021 Rules of Arbitration (the "2021 ICC Rules"). The revised Rules will apply to all requests for arbitration filed on or after 1 June 2026. Described by the ICC as the most substantial revision since 2012, the 2026 ICC Rules are designed to enhance efficiency, clarity and user-friendliness, ensuring ICC arbitration remains responsive to the evolving needs of global users. Claudia Salomon, President of the ICC International Court of Arbitration, has noted that the revisions "make the Rules clearer and arbitration more efficient, while preserving the flexibility and procedural integrity that parties expect". As the 1 June 2026 entry into force date approaches, it is essential for businesses, in-house counsel and practitioners across the region to familiarise themselves with the key changes that the new Rules will bring. This article provides an overview of the most significant amendments introduced by the 2026 ICC Rules, together with our initial observations on their practical significance for businesses and practitioners in the Middle East and beyond. Introduction of a Highly Expedited Procedure One of the most notable innovations under the 2026 ICC Rules is the introduction of a new highly expedited procedure, enabling tribunals to issue a final award within just three months. This mechanism is designed to meet the increasing demand for swift and enforceable decisions in urgent, time-sensitive disputes, and will operate on an opt-in basis as a pilot project subject to ongoing review. Under this framework, disputes may be resolved solely on the basis of written submissions, without a hearing, and parties may agree to the issuance of an award without reasons. Parties will be required to present their full case at the outset, including all evidence and arguments, and joinder and consolidation will not be permitted. A sole arbitrator is to be agreed upon by the parties within 20 days or, failing agreement, appointed by the ICC Court. It remains to be seen which sectors will adopt this procedure, although it is likely to appeal to industries such as cryptocurrency and commodities where speed is often commercially critical. Commentators have also noted that the procedure is likely to attract significant attention in the construction and energy sectors, as well as intellectual property, technology-related disputes and M&A arbitrations, where the ability to secure a rapid and final determination is often critical. In the construction and energy context, how this procedure will interact with DAB and adjudication mechanisms remains to be seen; however, it could prove a valuable additional tool for achieving timely, contemporaneous final resolution of issues central to the delivery of major projects, including disputes over development commitments, design standards, serial defects, acceleration instructions or the application of liquidated damages to interim milestones. Increased Threshold for the Expedited Procedure Under the 2026 ICC Rules, the monetary threshold for the automatic application of the Expedited Procedure Provisions ("EPP") will increase from USD 3 million to USD 4 million for claims brought under arbitration agreements concluded on or after 1 June 2026. Given that, in 2025 alone, over 40% of ICC cases did not exceed USD 4 million, this adjustment broadens the range of disputes eligible for expedited arbitration. Since the introduction of the EPP in 2017, the ICC Court has administered 1,034 cases resulting in 591 awards under these provisions. Importantly, party autonomy is preserved: parties remain free to opt in or out of the EPP regardless of whether a case falls within the automatic monetary threshold. Removal of Mandatory Terms of Reference Perhaps the most significant procedural change is the removal of mandatory Terms of Reference ("TORs"), long regarded as a defining feature of ICC arbitration. Under Article 23 of the 2021 ICC Rules, the arbitral tribunal was required to draw up TORs within 30 days of the file being transmitted to it, though extensions were frequently granted in practice. Under the 2026 ICC Rules, TORs are no longer a necessary step in ICC proceedings, although arbitral tribunals retain the discretion to establish them where appropriate as a useful case management tool. This approach builds on the experience of the EPP, under which TORs were already optional; the ICC Court has administered more than 1,000 cases under the EPP, with fewer than 25 tribunals deciding to draw up TORs. In parallel, the Case Management Conference ("CMC"), which remains mandatory and must be held within 30 days of the transmission of the file to the arbitral tribunal, assumes a more central role as the principal procedural milestone for structuring proceedings. Notably, no party may introduce new claims after the initial CMC without the authorisation of the arbitral tribunal, taking into account, amongst other factors, the nature of the new claims, the stage of the proceedings and any cost implications. Early Determination of Claims Taking inspiration from common law mechanisms and similar provisions already adopted by the LCIA, the 2026 ICC Rules introduce an early determination mechanism. Any party may request the arbitral tribunal to make an early determination of one or more claims or defences where such claims or defences are manifestly without merit or manifestly outside the jurisdiction of the tribunal. The arbitral tribunal retains full discretion as to whether to allow the request to proceed and, if so, shall adopt such procedural measures as it considers appropriate, after consulting the parties. This provision is a welcome development for practitioners seeking to prevent unmeritorious arguments from delaying proceedings and inflating costs. Flexible Time Limits for Rendering Awards Under Article 31 of the 2021 ICC Rules, arbitral tribunals were generally required to issue their final award within six months from the date the TORs were signed or approved, though this deadline was frequently extended in practice. The 2026 ICC Rules replace this fixed default with a more flexible approach: under Article 34, the President of the ICC Court shall fix, or subsequently extend, the time limit for rendering the final award, taking into account the procedural timetable or a reasoned request from the arbitral tribunal. In practice, most arbitrations will continue to operate under time limits aligned with the procedural timetable, as was already the prevailing approach under previous editions of the ICC Rules. Fully Electronic Communications and Awards Codifying what has become established practice, the 2026 ICC Rules specify that all communications and submissions should be conducted in electronic form, whether via email, ICC Case Connect or other digital means. This reflects a continued move toward greater efficiency, cost reduction and environmental sustainability in arbitration proceedings. In addition, upon consultation with the parties, arbitral tribunals will be empowered to sign awards electronically and in separate counterparts. Parties will, however, still be able to request hard copies where necessary — for instance, for enforcement purposes in jurisdictions where national courts require certified hard copies or original signed documents. Enhanced Disclosure Requirements and Arbitrator Independence The 2026 ICC Rules strengthen the framework governing arbitrator independence and impartiality. From the outset of the arbitration, each party must submit to the ICC Secretariat a list of persons and entities which it believes prospective arbitrators should consider, together with the reasons for such consideration. This new provision formalises a structured mechanism through which parties can proactively raise potential points at an early stage, thereby promoting efficiency and reducing the risk of late-stage challenges. For the first time, the 2026 ICC Rules codify the ICC Court's long-standing practice that any doubts a prospective arbitrator may have about whether to make a disclosure shall be resolved in favour of disclosure, and that disclosure alone does not, by itself, establish a lack of independence or impartiality. Confidentiality The ICC considered introducing default confidentiality for ICC arbitrations under the 2026 ICC Rules but ultimately decided against it. A blanket confidentiality regime was seen as potentially problematic, particularly for government parties that may require a greater degree of transparency. Instead, the 2026 ICC Rules introduce an express duty of confidentiality on arbitrators themselves, mirroring the existing obligation applicable to the ICC Court and Secretariat. By comparison, arbitral proceedings are confidential by default under several other leading arbitration rules, including the LCIA Rules (Article 30), the SIAC Rules (Rule 59) and the HKIAC Rules (Article 45). Enhanced Emergency Arbitration Provisions The 2026 ICC Rules introduce important clarifications to the emergency arbitration provisions. Emergency arbitrator proceedings may now be initiated not only against signatories to the arbitration agreement and their successors, but also against any party for which the President of the ICC Court is satisfied, on a prima facie basis, that a binding arbitration agreement may exist. This reflects the evolution in practice developed over 287 emergency arbitration applications administered since the provisions were first introduced in 2012. For the first time, the 2026 ICC Rules also expressly acknowledge preliminary orders, including on an ex parte basis. A party may request a preliminary order directing another party not to frustrate the purpose of the application — for instance, to prevent asset dissipation or destruction of evidence. Procedural safeguards are built into the framework: if a preliminary order is granted, the emergency arbitrator must immediately afford all other parties a reasonable opportunity to present their case and retains the power to modify or revoke the order in light of subsequent submissions. Truncated Tribunals The 2026 ICC Rules introduce a new provision addressing situations where an arbitrator dies or is removed after the last hearing or the filing of the last submissions. In such circumstances, the ICC Court may decide that the remaining arbitrators shall continue the arbitration without replacing the departed member, having taken into account the views of the remaining arbitrators and the parties, as well as any other relevant matters. This is a pragmatic measure designed to prevent the costly re-running of arbitrations that have already reached an advanced stage. Tribunal Secretaries The 2026 ICC Rules formalise the role of tribunal secretaries. After consulting the parties, the arbitral tribunal may appoint a tribunal secretary to work under its direction and control, without delegating its decision-making authority. Tribunal secretaries shall satisfy the same requirements of independence, impartiality and confidentiality as those applicable to arbitrators under the Rules, and shall sign a declaration of acceptance, availability, impartiality and independence prior to their appointment. Practical Implications for the Middle East The 2026 ICC Rules are of particular relevance to practitioners and businesses operating in the UAE, KSA, Egypt and Kuwait, where ICC arbitration remains a widely used dispute resolution mechanism across sectors including construction, energy, banking and finance, and infrastructure. The removal of mandatory TORs, the introduction of the highly expedited procedure, and the strengthening of the emergency arbitration provisions are likely to be of significant practical value in these jurisdictions, where the speed and enforceability of arbitral awards are often of paramount commercial importance. Businesses and in-house counsel in the region should review their existing arbitration clauses and dispute resolution strategies in light of the 2026 ICC Rules ahead of their entry into force on 1 June 2026. In particular, parties may wish to consider whether the new highly expedited procedure or the enhanced EPP threshold may be suitable for the types of disputes they most commonly encounter. GLA & Co's dispute resolution team is available to assist clients in understanding the impact of the 2026 ICC Rules and in reviewing and updating their contractual dispute resolution provisions accordingly. Authors: May El Mahdy, Senior Associate and Mohammed Al Awadhi, Partner.

Kuwait has entered a transformative phase in its public-health and compliance architecture with the issuance of Decree-Law No. 159 of 2025, effective December 14, 2025, a comprehensive overhaul of the narcotics, psychotropics, and chemical-precursor regime, repealing the four-decade-old 1983 and 1987 laws. The new framework modernizes Kuwait’s approach to substance control through a structured system of licensing, surveillance, treatment, data governance, and inter-agency coordination. Although the law’s immediate focus is public health and anti-trafficking enforcement, its implications extend into healthcare, pharmaceuticals, logistics, research, compliance, risk management, and corporate governance. This impacts pharmacies, manufacturers, technology providers, and supply-chain operators. This shift aligns with Kuwait’s broader objective of building institutional systems capable of supporting the next generation of economic and social reforms. At its core, the new regime establishes an integrated governance model, anchored in the Ministry of Health but coordinated with the Ministry of Interior, Customs, laboratories, treatment centers, and cross-border regulatory bodies. The forthcoming Executive Regulation is expected to unify these operational requirements through a detailed rulebook governing licensing, storage, electronic tracking, treatment protocols, and surveillance mechanisms. Institutional Architecture: Ministry of Health at the Center of a Cross-Sector Control Ecosystem The law repositions the Ministry of Health as the national authority responsible for the scientific, medical, regulatory, and oversight pillars of the framework. Under the law, the Ministry licenses all entities dealing with narcotic drugs, psychotropics, and chemical precursors; establishes central registers, quota systems, batch-tracking controls, and electronic monitoring platforms; and governs prescribing, dispensing, storage, destruction, and transport through detailed procedures to be formalized in the Executive Regulation. It further oversees rehabilitation and treatment centers, medical committees, and post-treatment monitoring systems. The Ministry of Interior plays a parallel enforcement role, particularly with respect to smuggling, trafficking networks, digital crime, and controlled deliveries, while Customs controls cross-border flows of substances and precursors. This alignment reflects a shift toward integrated compliance governance, where medical, enforcement, and data-governance mandates intersect. The structure is designed to create a controlled, traceable ecosystem capable of preventing diversion, ensuring public safety, and supporting evidence-based health interventions. From Policy to Implementation: Licensing, Electronic Tracking, and Supply-Chain Controls The law introduces a comprehensive licensing and control system applicable to hospitals, pharmacies, manufacturers, warehouses, research institutions, veterinary facilities, and transport operators. Its core pillars include electronic tracking systems covering import, storage, dispensing, return, and destruction of controlled substances; batch-tracking and serialization requirements for manufacturers and warehouses; supply-chain controls over qualified transport vehicles, secure containers, GPS-enabled routes, and mandatory reporting of delays or discrepancies; real-time, Ministry-linked electronic prescriptions to eliminate fraudulent or unauthorized dispensing; and inspection rights allowing regulators to access premises, records, samples, and audit trails. These measures mirror international best practices and reflect a deliberate move toward digital compliance, reducing diversion risk and strengthening Kuwait’s pharmaceutical and clinical governance environment. “For both healthcare providers and manufacturers, compliance will ultimately be expressed contractually. Agreements with vendors, logistics operators, and software providers must embed traceability tools, inspection cooperation, serialization obligations, and incident-reporting workflows aligned with regulatory expectations.” Treatment, Rehabilitation, and Medical Oversight: A Modern Public-Health Approach A core innovation in the law is the establishment of a medical-based model for addiction treatment. Under the articles, a specialized medical committee evaluates addiction cases and determines individualized treatment plans. Treatment may be voluntary or court-ordered, with strict confidentiality requirements; commitment periods count toward sentencing for eligible offenses; and release decisions are based on medical, not punitive, criteria. Rehabilitation programs involve coordinated social, psychological, and vocational support, anchored in clinical best practices. The law positions addiction as a medical condition, integrating treatment, rehabilitation, and post-care monitoring into the national health system. This public-health approach reduces stigma while strengthening institutional capacity to manage long-term addiction cycles and reintegration outcomes. Data Governance and Surveillance: A Controlled and Traceable Information System The law establishes sophisticated data-governance requirements comparable to those applied in Kuwait’s cyber and cloud sectors. It mandates centralized electronic databases covering licenses, imports, exports, prescriptions, dispensing records, inventories, and destruction logs; confidential medical records with limited access pathways for judicial and medical authorities; mandatory reporting of irregularities, losses, discrepancies, and adverse reactions; and digital integration between ministries, laboratories, customs authorities, and enforcement bodies. These systems create a unified surveillance environment in which every dose of controlled substance is traceable, and every treatment event is securely recorded. Enforcement and Regulatory Expectations: High Penalties, Clear Duties The law separates (i) criminal offenses (such as trafficking, manufacturing, distribution, and smuggling) from (ii) regulatory breaches by licensed or registrable entities. Criminal offenses carry severe custodial penalties up to life imprisonment when aggravating factors are present. Aggravating factors that can elevate penalties to the death penalty include exploiting or involving a minor or a person lacking capacity, abusing an official position, or acting on behalf of a criminal organization. Regulatory and administrative sanctions apply to non-compliance with licensing, storage, dispensing, transport, record-keeping, or destruction obligations by regulated entities. Authorities may order immediate confiscation of substances, equipment, vehicles, and proceeds; close facilities; suspend or revoke licenses; impose doubled fines and activity suspensions on legal persons; and, for non-Kuwaiti offenders convicted of relevant crimes, deportation. Inspectors are empowered to enter, search, and inspect premises; review and copy records; require destruction of stock; and mandate compliance remediation. “Supervisory expectations are rising. Entities that maintain documented standard operating procedures, conduct periodic control assessments, and implement compliance monitoring programs will face fewer corrective measures following inspection. Contracting and Operational Implications for Healthcare and Industry The new framework requires that operational relationships reflect regulatory controls through clear contractual alignment. Priority themes include inventory-management and serialization obligations; secure transport requirements tied to permit conditions; joint inspection and cooperation clauses; record-keeping commitments aligned to retention mandates; data-sharing and confidentiality frameworks that comply with health-records protection rules; and incident-reporting workflows consistent with statutory timelines. For pharmaceutical companies, hospitals, laboratories, and logistics operators, the completeness of these terms will increasingly determine regulatory resilience and audit readiness. A National Control Strategy: Future Trajectory The forthcoming Executive Regulation is expected to integrate technical storage standards; e-prescribing and e-tracking specifications; detailed licensing conditions; precursor-control requirements; laboratory and destruction protocols; and inter-agency coordination procedures. Once issued, these regulations will solidify Kuwait’s movement toward a more mature, compliance-driven public-health system to connect enforcement, treatment, and supply-chain governance within a unified national structure. Conclusion Law No. 159 of 2025 represents a generational modernization of Kuwait’s narcotics and psychotropics regime. Far beyond a criminal framework, it introduces a national compliance infrastructure spanning healthcare, supply chains, digital systems, treatment models, and cross-border coordination. As Kuwait moves from legislative reform to operational execution, entities that engage early, align their internal controls with the new regulatory requirements, and prepare for the forthcoming Executive Regulation will not only mitigate legal and operational risk but also contribute to a safer and more resilient public-health environment. Authors: Legal Director, Mohammed Al Awadhi, Senior Associate, May El Mahdy and Trainee Lawyer, Fahad Al Zouman

As part of its ongoing efforts to modernize Kuwait’s capital markets and align its regulatory framework with international best practices, the Capital Markets Authority (“CMA”) has issued decision no (85) of 2026, introducing a series of amendments to the executive Bylaws of law no.7 of 2010 concerning the establishment of the CMA and regulation of securities activities. The decision forms part of the second phase of the Qualified broker initiative, a key component of the CMA’s broader Capital Market Development launched in 2025. The amendments seek to enhance market efficiency by restructuring the trading commission framework, introducing additional financial services, and strengthening the role of licensed brokerage firms in managing clients assets. Regulatory framework & Key objectives The decision aims to expand the range of services that licensed brokers may offer while improving the overall trading experience for investors. A notable feature of the amendments is the introduction of a new service allowing brokers to deposit clients trading funds into income generating accounts maintained with commercial banks. This enables idle cash balances allocated for trading purposes to generate returns for investors while remaining available for securities transactions. Restructuring the Trading Commission Model One of the most significant reforms introduced by this decision is the restructuring of the trading commission applicable on the Kuwait Stock Exchange. The CMA has unified the overall trading commission applicable to both the Premier Market and the Main market, creating a standardized commission structure across the exchange. The decision also revives the allocation of commission components between the stock exchange, the clearing company, and the brokerage firms. Under the new framework the exchange and clearing fees are fixed while brokerage firms are granted greater commercial flexibility by allowing them to offer discounts on their brokerage commissions, subject to limits determined by CMA. In addition, the decision abolished certain fixed transaction fees, including the 5KD custody settlement fee charged per executed transaction on custody accounts and the 0.50KD settlement fee previously imposed on transactions exceeding 50KD. The decision also increases the minimum brokerage commission from 0.250 Fils to 0.500 Fils.  The removal of these fees is expected to reduce transaction costs and improve overall efficiency of trading activities. Conclusion The CMA’s Decision no (85) of 2026 represents another significant milestone in the CMA’s capital market reform agenda. By introducing innovative financial services, restructuring the trading commission framework, and reducing transaction costs, the decision improves market efficiency while promoting competition and the continued development of Kuwait’s securities market. As these reforms are implemented market participants should keep an eye out and review their operational compliance frameworks to fully capitalize on the opportunities presented. Authors: Mohammed Al Awadhi, Partner and Ahmed AlBuaijan, Trainee Lawyer

Kuwait has developed a structured and proportionate pathway for small and medium-sized enterprises “SMEs” to access public capital through the Emerging Companies Market “ECM” at the Kuwait Stock Exchange “KSE”. Established as a dedicated listing segment under the Capital Markets Authority’s “CMA” market-segmentation framework, the ECM balances reduced entry thresholds with clear governance, disclosure, and investor-protection standards. Designed for growth-stage companies, the ECM provides a regulated route to equity financing while avoiding the full complexity of the main market. Its architecture reflects Kuwait’s broader policy objective of strengthening capital-market depth, improving SME access to funding, and institutionalising governance across the private sector in line with international best practices. Although the ECM is primarily a capital-raising platform, its implications extend to corporate governance, valuation discipline, disclosure controls, shareholder structuring, and regulatory compliance. For SMEs seeking institutional credibility, diversified funding sources, and long-term scalability, ECM listing represents a strategic legal and commercial milestone. Market Architecture and Regulatory Authority The ECM operates within Kuwait’s statutory capital-markets framework, under which the KSE is authorized, subject to CMA approval, to segment the market and allocate securities to each segment based on published eligibility criteria. No company may list without a formal recommendation from the KSE and approval from the CMA following review of a complete application. Applications must be submitted using Exchange-prescribed forms and supported by documentation required under the Exchange Rulebook and the CMA Executive Bylaws. The CMA is required to decide on a complete application within thirty business days, providing applicants with procedural certainty. This gatekeeping structure ensures that ECM admission standards are enforceable, transparent, and aligned with broader market-integrity objectives. Admission Standards and Eligibility Thresholds While detailed ECM requirements are set out in the Exchange’s rules, the principal eligibility thresholds reflect SME operating realities. Issuers must demonstrate a minimum total fair market value of issued share capital of at least KWD 750,000; a free float of at least 20% of the company’s share capital; and a minimum of 20 shareholders, each holding shares valued at KWD 5,000 or more, except where the company is incorporated as a public joint stock company. The company must demonstrate continuity of activity for the last two financial years in one or more of the main purposes stated in its Articles of Association, with the majority of its revenues generated from those activities. It must also have audited financial statements approved by the General Assembly for the two financial years preceding the listing application. The issuer must be a shareholding company with freely transferable shares, subject only to limited statutory or contractual restrictions. Companies may list newly issued shares, existing shares, or a combination of both, provided that the applicable ECM requirements and CMA approvals are satisfied. Valuation, Offering Structure, and Prospectus Discipline Where ECM admission involves a public or private offering, Kuwait’s dealing-in-securities regime applies. This includes mandatory CMA approval of the prospectus, which must disclose business risks, financial history, governance structures, management details, related-party transactions, and use of proceeds. Where share premiums or fair value are relevant, a valuation report must be prepared by a CMA-licensed investment advisor or asset valuator, setting out the methodology and basis of valuation. In public offerings, allocation safeguards apply, including subscriber withdrawal rights where free-float or shareholder-dispersion thresholds are not met upon allocation. These mechanisms embed pricing discipline and investor confidence into ECM transactions and support orderly capital formation. Governance and Disclosure Obligations Post-Listing ECM issuers are listed companies and are therefore subject to ongoing governance and disclosure obligations. These include compliance with general assembly procedures covering advance notice, agenda disclosure, authenticated minutes, and shareholder participation; transparent board-nomination and election processes with advance disclosure of candidates and their executive or independent status; and the implementation of core governance controls, including board oversight of executive management, an Audit Committee reporting to the board, a risk-management framework, and the appointment of a Compliance Officer or outsourced equivalent. ECM issuers must also comply with periodic financial-reporting obligations, including the publication of annual and semi-annual financial statements audited by CMA-registered auditors, subject to rotation and notification requirements. Failure to meet reporting or governance obligations may trigger trading suspension, disciplinary action against the board, or, where deficiencies persist, delisting. Addressing Structural SME Challenges Through ECM Listing The ECM is designed to address recurring structural challenges faced by SMEs. From a financing perspective, it provides a regulated platform for equity fundraising and access to future capital-market instruments, reducing reliance on bilateral bank financing. From a human-capital perspective, ECM-listed companies are better positioned to implement employee equity and incentive plans within a defined legal and disclosure framework. From an operational standpoint, mandatory reporting cycles, audit oversight, and disclosure controls drive stronger internal controls, financial discipline, and risk management. Institutionally, baseline governance and transparency standards enhance credibility and engagement with investors, lenders, and strategic counterparties. Role of Licensed Market Participants ECM listings rely on coordinated input from licensed market participants. A Listing Advisor, licensed by the CMA to carry out investment-advisory activities for listing purposes, guides the issuer through eligibility assessment, documentation, governance uplift, and regulatory interfaces. Where valuation is required, a CMA-licensed investment advisor or asset valuator provides the valuation report supporting fair value or share premium. Issuers must appoint CMA-registered auditors to anchor financial reporting, and, where offerings are involved, subscription agents and underwriters may be engaged to manage allocation and book-building mechanics. The KSE manages the application intake and recommendation process, while the CMA exercises approval, supervision, and enforcement authority. Practical Legal Workstreams for ECM Readiness From a practical legal perspective, ECM readiness typically involves a structured work plan covering eligibility and free-float gap analysis; review of shareholder agreements and transfer restrictions; governance and committee structuring; coordination of prospectus and valuation documentation; capital-increase approvals and management of pre-emptive rights; audit readiness and IFRS alignment; and establishment of a post-listing compliance calendar covering reporting, disclosures, and general assemblies. Early legal and governance structuring significantly reduces execution risk and regulatory friction during the listing process. Conclusion The Emerging Companies Market represents a calibrated and credible entry point into Kuwait’s capital markets for SMEs with sustainable growth ambitions. By combining proportionate admission standards with enforceable governance and disclosure obligations, the ECM offers a legally robust platform for capital formation, valuation transparency, and institutional credibility. For companies considering ECM admission, early engagement with a Listing Advisor, disciplined governance preparation, and structured legal readiness are essential to achieving a smooth listing and sustaining long-term compliance as a public company. Authors: Mohammed Al Awadhi, Legal Director and Fahad Al Zouman, Trainee Lawyer

On 29 March 2026, the Board of Directors of the Kuwait Competition Protection Agency (the "CPA") issued Decision No. 33 of 2026 (the "Decision"), establishing for the first time a formal framework governing the confidentiality of information submitted to the CPA in connection with competition proceedings. The Decision introduces clear definitions of trade secrets and confidential information, establishes a structured process for requesting confidential treatment, specifies the criteria the CPA's Executive Director must apply when evaluating such requests, and addresses the procedures following approval or rejection of a confidentiality claim. Key Definitions and Scope The Decision establishes a two-tier system for the protection of information submitted to the CPA, distinguishing between trade secrets, which must be preserved in all circumstances, and other confidential information, which is subject to the Executive Director's discretionary assessment on a case-by-case basis. Members of the Board of Directors, employees of the CPA, secondees, and persons engaged to work at the CPA are all bound by the obligation to preserve the confidentiality of trade secrets in all circumstances. A "trade secret" is defined as information of commercial value relating to the business activity of a competitor, the disclosure of which to the public or its transfer to a person without authority would cause harm to that competitor. This includes any information, design, method, formula, technique, or composition that is not publicly known and that provides its owner with a competitive advantage. The protection of trade secrets therefore operates as a self-executing obligation: if information objectively meets the definitional criteria, CPA personnel are bound to preserve its confidentiality without any formal request or discretionary assessment. Notably, however, the Decision does not prescribe a mechanism for determining whether particular information qualifies as a trade secret, nor does it designate the individual within the CPA responsible for making that determination. This contrasts with the treatment of confidential information, where the Decision expressly provides that the CPA "shall have the right to determine whether the information is confidential." This gap remains an open question under the current framework. As a practical matter, parties should not rely solely on the trade secret classification and should submit a confidentiality request for all sensitive information to ensure an additional layer of protection. "Confidential information" is defined more broadly as any information submitted by a competitor or a third party to the CPA with a request to preserve its confidentiality. This category includes financial information, technical information relating to expertise and practical skills, cost evaluation methods, production secrets and processes, supply sources, market shares, lists of customers and distributors, marketing plans, pricing and cost structures, and sales strategies. Practitioners should note that this list is illustrative rather than exhaustive, and parties may seek confidential treatment for other categories of commercially sensitive information not expressly enumerated. Importantly, if a person submits information to the CPA without an accompanying request for confidentiality, that person shall be deemed to have no objection to the disclosure of all information submitted for the purposes for which it was provided. This default rule underscores the importance of lodging a contemporaneous confidentiality request at the time of filing. Requesting Confidential Treatment Parties seeking to protect confidential information must submit a formal request for confidentiality in the prescribed form. The request must identify the information for which confidentiality is sought, provide two copies of the submission (one containing the confidential information and another with the confidential information redacted), and set out a comprehensive explanation of the reasons for confidential treatment and the potential harm that would result from disclosure. When preparing redacted versions, parties should ensure that the non-confidential copy remains meaningful and comprehensible to other parties who may need to respond to the submission; overly extensive redactions may prompt the Executive Director to question the legitimacy of the confidentiality claim. The explanation of potential harm should be specific and substantiated-generic assertions that disclosure would cause competitive harm are unlikely to be persuasive. Parties should consider articulating the precise nature of the competitive disadvantage, the identity of competitors who might benefit from disclosure, and the duration and magnitude of anticipated harm. Evaluation and Decision Making The Executive Director evaluates each request on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the importance and value of the information in determining whether a violation has occurred, whether the information is known only to a limited number of persons, whether it can be ascertained from publicly available sources, and the period during which disclosure would cause harm. If confidentiality is approved, the confidential copy is placed in a special file accessible only to the team handling the matter, while non-confidential information is placed in the study file. If the Executive Director considers the request unjustified or determines that disclosure is necessary, the applicant is afforded fifteen days to present arguments in support of confidentiality. If the applicant fails to present arguments within this period, the CPA may deem the applicant to have no objection to disclosure. If the applicant does present arguments for preserving confidentiality, the Executive Director may review the decision and approve the confidentiality request where the arguments are sufficient; the applicant shall be notified accordingly. The Executive Director retains the power to review confidentiality decisions at any time until the conclusion of the matter under examination. If the Executive Director subsequently determines that the information no longer warrants confidential treatment, the same fifteen-day procedure for presenting arguments shall apply. Practitioners should calendar the fifteen-day deadline carefully, as failure to respond results in a deemed waiver of confidentiality. It is advisable to prepare contingency arguments in advance of any submission so that a timely response can be filed if confidentiality is initially denied. Practical Implications The introduction of the Decision represents a welcome and significant development for parties engaged in competition proceedings before the CPA. For the first time, a structured process governs the treatment of commercially sensitive information, providing parties with a clear mechanism to seek confidential treatment and a defined standard against which the Executive Director must evaluate such requests. Parties submitting information to the CPA—whether in the context of merger control filings, competition investigations, or other proceedings—should ensure that confidentiality requests are submitted at the time of filing, on the prescribed form, and accompanied by a comprehensive explanation of the reasons for confidential treatment and the potential harm that would result from disclosure. Failure to submit a contemporaneous confidentiality request carries a significant consequence: information provided without such a request will be deemed non-confidential for the purposes for which it was submitted. Parties should also note that the Executive Director retains ongoing discretion to revisit confidentiality decisions at any stage, meaning that the confidential status of information is not irrevocable. To mitigate this risk, parties should periodically reassess whether information previously designated as confidential continues to warrant such treatment and be prepared to supplement their justifications if circumstances change. Companies operating in or entering the Kuwaiti market should familiarize themselves with the new framework and integrate confidentiality request procedures into their standard practice when engaging with the CPA. In particular, in-house counsel and compliance teams should develop standardized confidentiality request templates and internal protocols to ensure consistent treatment across all CPA submissions. Multinational companies should also consider how the Kuwaiti framework compares with confidentiality regimes in other jurisdictions where they operate, as differing standards may require tailored approaches to information management in cross-border matters. Authors: Asad Ahmad, Partner and Head of Antitrust & Competition and Fahad Al Zouman, trainee lawyer.

The Kuwaiti Public Authority for Industry ("PAI") just issued Ministerial Decision No. 8 of 2026 setting out detailed rules and procedures governing the withdrawal of industrial plots under the PAI's supervision. The Decision was issued on 5 May 2026 and published in the Official Gazette (Issue No. 1790, dated 10 May 2026). The Decision applies to all categories of plots overseen by the PAI, including industrial, service, commercial, and craft plots, as well as sand quarry sites, gravel storage, and car scrap locations. It establishes a structured framework for how and when the Minister of Commerce and Industry (or their delegate) may order the withdrawal of an allocated plot. The grounds for withdrawal, set out in Article 2, cover a wide range of scenarios. These include obtaining an industrial licence or plot allocation through false or misleading information, halting production for six months or more without the PAI's approval, failing to register the project in the industrial register, using the plot for purposes other than those specified in the allocation decision, subletting the plot or granting third-party usage rights without authorisation, violating environmental protection or safety rules, and expiry of a temporary allocation period. Once a withdrawal decision is published in the Official Gazette, the relevant department or committee has one month to begin enforcement proceedings, and the plot holder is then notified and given one month from the date of notification to vacate the plot and hand it over free of occupants. If the holder fails to comply, the PAI's legal affairs department is instructed to initiate court proceedings for eviction and recovery of all outstanding amounts. That said, the Decision includes a grievance mechanism under Article 6, whereby any affected party may file a grievance within 30 days of the publication or notification of the withdrawal decision. Filing a grievance within the statutory deadline suspends the enforcement of the withdrawal decision until the grievance is resolved. But if the grievance is rejected, the department resumes enforcement within two weeks of publication of the rejection decision, and the plot holder must vacate within one month. There is also room for flexibility, as the Director General may, upon request, extend the evacuation period by up to six months from the date of publication of the withdrawal or grievance rejection decision, provided the plot holder pays all outstanding financial obligations upfront for the requested extension period. As it pertains to penalties, late handover triggers a monthly penalty starting at 25% of the annual usage fee for the first month of delay, increasing to 50% in the second month, 75% in the third, and reaching 100% from the fourth month onwards. This applies to each subsequent month until full handover. In addition, a daily penalty of KD 100 applies from the day following the expiry of the specified deadline until handover is complete. This Decision brings much-needed clarity and structure to an area that has historically been a source of disputes between the PAI and industrial plot holders. Businesses currently holding industrial allocations should review their compliance status carefully and ensure they are meeting all conditions of their allocation, particularly around production continuity, registration, and permitted use, to avoid triggering withdrawal proceedings. For advice on how these new rules may affect your industrial plot allocation, contact Managing Partner, Alex Saleh and Partner, Asad Ahmad. Authors: Asad Ahmad, Partner and Liana Rashid, Trainee Lawyer.