Jurisdiction in the United Arab Emirates is determined by statute rather than by judicial discretion. For Muslims, Federal Law No. 41 of 2024 on Personal Status provides that the courts of the Federation are competent when there is a territorial nexus, whether through domicile, residence, employment or the presence of property, and also when the marriage was contracted in the Emirates. Emirati nationality closes the door to foreign personal laws: if a party holds UAE citizenship, the federal law applies, even if they also hold another nationality.

For non-Muslims outside Abu Dhabi, Federal Law No. 41 of 2022 on Civil Personal Status establishes an alternative forum. Its jurisdictional foundations are similar: it applies where the parties are non-Muslim residents, where the marriage was concluded under the civil regime, or where there is property situated in the UAE. The law was designed expressly for expatriates, ensuring that those of differing faiths or nationalities may divorce within a system free from religious doctrine.

Abu Dhabi has adopted its own, more expansive system under Law No. 14 of 2021 as amended by Law No. 15 of 2021 and Regulation No. 8 of 2022. Here, the three jurisdictional pillars are codified with particular clarity. Subject-matter jurisdiction extends to all civil family matters arising from marriage, divorce, custody, maintenance, succession and associated claims. Territorial jurisdiction arises wherever there is a nexus to the Emirate through residence, domicile, workplace, property or celebration of the marriage itself. Personal jurisdiction embraces all foreigners, whether Muslim or not, and non-Muslim UAE citizens who elect to submit to the court’s authority. Recent case law in Abu Dhabi has illustrated the inclusivity of this regime: even Muslim expatriates have been permitted to divorce before the Civil Family Court where their nationality or marriage ties lie with jurisdictions that do not predominantly apply Islamic law.

The UAE’s civil law tradition does not admit the common law doctrine of forum conveniens. Once the statutory thresholds are satisfied, the court must accept jurisdiction, regardless of the existence of foreign proceedings. In practice, however, the courts have shown a measure of pragmatism. The Abu Dhabi Civil Family Court, for example, has occasionally paused its own proceedings where both parties consent and where a foreign court has issued an antisuit injunction restraining the continuation of litigation in Abu Dhabi. Such stays are temporary, generally limited to a matter of months, and are granted in the spirit of judicial comity rather than by virtue of express statutory provision. Absent such exceptional circumstances, concurrency is tolerated, and the risk of conflicting judgments is managed only by prudential restraint and mutual respect between tribunals.

For Muslims, applicable law is the federal personal status legislation, now codified in Law No. 41 of 2024. The statute is mandatory, and foreign laws are not applied where Emirati nationality is present. For non-Muslims, the applicable law is the federal Civil Personal Status Law of 2022, or, in Abu Dhabi, the Emirate’s own civil legislation. In neither case do the courts apply foreign law. Where parties attempt to invoke a national law by contract or by reference in their pleadings, the UAE courts will not give effect to it save in inheritance matters, where a non-Muslim expatriate may elect in a registered will that his or her national law shall govern succession. In the field of divorce and property division, the UAE courts apply only their own substantive law.

The approach to divorce differs sharply between the two schemes. For Muslims under Federal Law No. 41 of 2024, divorce remains grounded in the Islamic tradition, though expressed in a modernised form. It may be pronounced unilaterally, obtained by mutual consent, or granted judicially upon proof of harm. Although the procedure has been simplified compared with its predecessor, the concept of fault and cause remains embedded in the law.

For non-Muslims, whether under the federal Civil Personal Status Law of 2022 or in Abu Dhabi’s more elaborate civil regime, divorce is emphatically no-fault. Either spouse may appear before the court and declare a wish to terminate the marriage, without the need to justify the request or to prove misconduct by the other. In Abu Dhabi, the statute requires that such cases be disposed of within thirty days of filing, making the Emirate one of the swiftest jurisdictions in the world for the dissolution of marriage. The simplicity of the no-fault model reduces conflict, minimises the emotional toll on families, and aligns Abu Dhabi and the wider federal system with modern international practice.

Service is conducted through the machinery of the courts, in Arabic and English where the civil regimes apply. The petition is filed in prescribed bilingual form, and the respondent is formally notified with details of the claim and the date of the hearing. Where the respondent resides abroad, service may be effected through diplomatic channels or, increasingly, by electronic means authorised by the court. The process is designed to ensure fairness, allowing the respondent adequate opportunity to answer.

It is possible for spouses to present a joint application for divorce, particularly in the non-Muslim regimes. In practice, however, it is sufficient for one party alone to seek dissolution. The non-Muslim laws entrench the principle that marriage is a contract terminable at will, and therefore the unilateral expression of a settled wish to divorce is sufficient for the court to grant relief.

Foreign marriages are recognised if they are valid under the law of the place where they were celebrated and do not contravene UAE public policy. Once properly attested, translated and registered, such marriages are enforceable before the UAE courts. Customary and religious marriages are recognised where they meet the formalities of the foreign jurisdiction, though they cannot be concluded under the civil procedures of Abu Dhabi or the federal non-Muslim law. Civil partnerships and civil unions, however, have no standing in the UAE.

Same-sex marriages and civil unions are not recognised in the United Arab Emirates. They cannot be concluded within its territory, nor are they given effect if entered into abroad. The prohibition is categorical and applies across both the Muslim and non-Muslim regimes.

The powers of the UAE courts in financial matters are carefully prescribed, yet they differ according to whether the parties fall under the Muslim or non-Muslim regimes. For Muslims, Federal Law No. 41 of 2024 preserves the traditional division between spousal maintenance, or nafaqa, and the provision for children. A wife may claim maintenance during marriage and for a limited period thereafter, together with the deferred portion of her mahr, while children remain entitled to support until majority. The new statute introduces greater clarity in calculating these entitlements, drawing upon the income of the father, the standard of living enjoyed during the marriage, and the best interests of the children. It does not, however, create any doctrine of community of property, nor does it authorise the redistribution of assets by reference to contributions or need. Each spouse departs the marriage with property held in his or her name, subject only to the obligations of maintenance and mahr.

For non-Muslims, the picture is markedly different. The federal Civil Personal Status Law of 2022 allows for claims of spousal support, child maintenance and property adjustment. Abu Dhabi goes further still. Under Law No. 14 of 2021 and Regulation No. 8 of 2022, the Civil Family Court is empowered to make a wide range of financial orders. It may award a lump sum to the wife calculated according to a formula that multiplies a quarter of the husband’s income by the years of marriage, subject to judicial discretion to increase or decrease in the light of factors such as the age of the parties, their economic position, and the impact of unilateral divorce. It may also order capital compensation, redistributing wealth between the spouses with reference to income, assets and fairness, assisted by accounting experts. In addition, the court may make orders for child maintenance which cover schooling, healthcare, accommodation and daily needs, and which endure until the child reaches majority. The principle throughout the non-Muslim systems is equality between the spouses and the primacy of the child’s welfare, achieved by the deliberate grant of judicial discretion framed by statutory models.

For Muslims, the guiding principle is separation of property. Each spouse retains ownership of assets held in his or her name, and the court has no power to reallocate them save in execution of contractual rights such as mahr. The Muslim law is one of obligations rather than redistribution, ensuring that needs are met but not seeking to equalise resources.

For non-Muslims, particularly in Abu Dhabi, the guiding principle is equity. Regulation No. 8 of 2022 provides the court with formulae for calculation, but always subjects them to the overarching requirement of fairness and proportionality. The judge may consider duration of marriage, disparity of earning capacity, sacrifices made for the family, and the contributions of each spouse, both financial and domestic. The statutory models, whether income-based or asset-based, serve as benchmarks, but the discretion of the court ensures that outcomes are tailored to the circumstances of each case. The aim is neither rigid equality nor strict separation, but a fair allocation that provides continuity of lifestyle and protection against hardship.

Yes. Both federal and Abu Dhabi laws authorise interim measures to prevent injustice while proceedings are pending. For Muslims, the Personal Status Court may order provisional maintenance to ensure that a wife and children are not left without support during litigation. For non-Muslims, the civil laws empower the judge to direct interim maintenance for the spouse and children, covering essential living expenses, education and healthcare. The principle is one of necessity and proportionality: the court will act to secure stability and prevent destitution, while reserving final judgment for the substantive hearing. Unlike some common law systems, however, interim provision does not ordinarily extend to legal costs, which must be borne by the parties themselves.

In the Muslim system, spousal maintenance is limited. A wife may claim support during marriage and for the short period following divorce known as the ‘idda. Beyond that, the obligation ceases, and there is no concept of lifelong alimony. Federal Law No. 41 of 2024 confirms this structure, while refining the calculation of maintenance by reference to income and standard of living.

In the non-Muslim regimes, spousal maintenance takes a different form. Under Federal Law No. 41 of 2022 it may be awarded, but Abu Dhabi has codified it in the form of a lump sum payable upon divorce. This lump sum functions like an end-of-service gratuity: finite, calculable, and designed to mark the termination of the marriage rather than to prolong dependence. Once satisfied, it extinguishes ongoing obligations, leaving only child maintenance to continue. This approach provides clarity and finality, reducing the scope for protracted financial ties between former spouses.

Enforcement of foreign judgments in the UAE has been significantly modernised by the new Civil Procedure Code enacted in 2022. Under Articles 222 to 225, foreign financial orders may be enforced if the foreign court had jurisdiction, if the order is final, if due process was observed, and if enforcement does not offend UAE public policy. There is no longer any need to bring a substantive action; an application to the execution court suffices. Reciprocity remains an important consideration: UAE courts look to whether the foreign jurisdiction would, in principle, enforce a UAE order. In family matters, the courts have shown a pragmatic willingness to enforce foreign financial orders, particularly those relating to child maintenance, provided they are consistent with the UAE’s public order and morals. Orders that contravene core principles, such as indefinite spousal support inconsistent with the UAE’s lump sum model, may be modified or refused. The overall trend is towards recognition, tempered by vigilance to preserve the integrity of the domestic legal framework.

Yes. Once a foreign divorce has been recognised in the Emirates through the process of attestation and registration, financial claims may be brought before the competent UAE court. For Muslims, these will be determined under the federal personal status law; for non-Muslims, they will be assessed under the civil regimes. This allows an expatriate who has divorced abroad to return to the UAE and pursue financial provision in respect of assets or children located within the jurisdiction. The claim is treated as independent of the foreign decree and is governed exclusively by UAE law.

The United Arab Emirates does not recognise a system of community of property between spouses, nor does it impose a default matrimonial property regime akin to those found in continental Europe. For Muslims, property rights remain governed by the principles of separation entrenched in Islamic law: each spouse retains ownership of assets held in his or her own name, and the court lacks jurisdiction to redistribute property upon divorce. The rights of a wife are confined to her mahr, her entitlement to maintenance during marriage and for the period immediately following divorce, and such child support as the husband must provide.

For non-Muslims, the civil regimes similarly reject community property as a matter of default law, but they permit spouses to determine for themselves the financial incidents of marriage. Federal Law No. 41 of 2022 expressly treats marriage as a civil contract into which the parties may insert conditions, including provisions for financial entitlements on divorce. Abu Dhabi goes further: under its Civil Family Court legislation, pre-marital agreements may be formally registered with the civil marriage contract, thereby giving them statutory force. Foreign matrimonial property regimes are not imported into the UAE, and the courts will not apply them proprio motu. Yet expatriates may, by agreement, replicate elements of such regimes in their contracts, and the civil courts will respect them provided they do not contravene UAE public order or prejudice children’s rights.

The answer depends upon which of the parallel systems applies. For Muslims, even under the newly promulgated Federal Law No. 41 of 2024, nuptial agreements as understood in the West have no binding force. The only effective contractual mechanism lies in the Islamic marriage contract itself, where a wife may stipulate conditions and where the amount of deferred mahr is recorded. Beyond that, contractual autonomy is constrained by the principle that personal status rights are matters of public order. A Muslim spouse cannot contract out of maintenance, of mahr, or of a child’s rights. A foreign prenuptial agreement produced to a Muslim court will at best be treated as evidence of intention, but it will not displace the statutory entitlements.

For non-Muslims, the position is radically different. Federal Law No. 41 of 2022 and Abu Dhabi’s Law No. 14 of 2021 both permit parties to regulate financial outcomes by contract. Article 9 of the federal statute makes explicit that where the marriage contract stipulates conditions concerning alimony or other financial claims, those conditions take precedence; only in their absence does the court revert to statutory defaults. In Abu Dhabi, Regulation No. 8 of 2022 provides for the registration of pre-marital agreements at the time of civil marriage, incorporating them directly into the contract and thus into the court record. Once registered, they are binding and displace judicial discretion save where public policy intervenes.

Foreign nuptial agreements can be relied upon but their force depends upon compliance with local formalities. A foreign contract must be translated into Arabic by a certified translator, notarised and legalised through the UAE’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs to be admissible. The prudent course for expatriates is to execute a mirror agreement in the UAE that reflects the foreign terms but conforms to domestic requirements. Courts in both Dubai and Abu Dhabi have shown willingness to enforce such agreements, particularly where they are freely entered into with disclosure and fairness, but will not uphold provisions that purport to limit a child’s rights or that leave a spouse destitute

For Muslims, child maintenance remains firmly anchored in the principles of Islamic law as codified in Federal Law No. 41 of 2024. The obligation rests upon the father, who must provide for the child’s accommodation, education, medical care and daily needs until majority. Majority is defined as the attainment of eighteen years of age, though the obligation may be extended where the child continues in education or where incapacity prevents self-sufficiency. The quantum is assessed by reference to the father’s means and the standard of living to which the child has been accustomed.

For non-Muslims, both the federal Civil Personal Status Law of 2022 and Abu Dhabi’s civil regime adopt a secular model but reach a similar conclusion: it is the father who bears the principal responsibility for maintenance, regardless of custody arrangements. The calculation is holistic, taking account of the child’s needs, the lifestyle enjoyed during the marriage, and the resources of the father. Abu Dhabi’s Regulation No. 8 of 2022 lists categories of expenditure that may be claimed, including housing, a domestic helper, school fees and associated expenses, health insurance, visa costs, and day-to-day living requirements. The court requires documentary evidence, and experts may be appointed to assess capacity to pay. The obligation endures until majority, and it cannot be waived, since it is treated as a matter of public order.

Yes. The duty to maintain a child is conceived broadly, extending beyond subsistence to encompass all elements necessary to preserve stability and continuity. Under the Muslim regime, the father may be ordered to provide housing or a housing allowance for the custodial parent and children, and to cover the costs of education, healthcare and upbringing in accordance with his means. The federal statute treats these obligations as integral to child maintenance, not as discrete claims.

In the civil regimes for non-Muslims, the same principle is codified. Article 19 of Abu Dhabi’s Regulation No. 8 of 2022 empowers the court to order a housing allowance for the custodial parent, typically the mother, for the duration of joint custody. This is conceived as part of the father’s overarching responsibility to provide for his children. Federal Law No. 41 of 2022 contains equivalent provisions, reinforced by Cabinet Decision No. 122 of 2023, which confirms that educational, medical and residential expenses fall within the father’s financial obligations. These orders are flexible, tailored to the child’s welfare and the father’s capacity, and may be revisited as circumstances evolve.

Until recently, cohabitation outside marriage was prohibited in the United Arab Emirates and carried penal consequences. That position has now altered as part of the sweeping reforms of personal status law. Consensual cohabitation by adults is no longer criminalised, and unmarried couples may live together without fear of prosecution. Yet recognition in the criminal sense does not translate into recognition in family law. There is no civil status accorded to cohabitees, and the law does not create rights or obligations between them analogous to those of spouses.

The answer is none. Neither the federal Personal Status Law for Muslims nor the civil regimes for non-Muslims confer any entitlement on an unmarried partner upon separation. Property remains with the legal owner, and there is no jurisdiction for the court to redistribute assets, award maintenance, or recognise claims based on cohabitation. The only exception arises in respect of children. Where a child is born to an unmarried couple, the father may now acknowledge paternity and thereby assume the obligations of child maintenance under the relevant regime. But between the adults themselves, the law recognises no financial claims. Cohabitation may be tolerated socially, but it does not create legal obligations in family law.

For Muslims under Federal Law No. 41 of 2024, the framework retains the traditional division between custody and guardianship, though expressed with a greater emphasis on the best interests of the child. Custody relates to day-to-day care, and guardianship encompasses legal authority over matters such as education, health and travel. Mothers are ordinarily custodians of young children, while fathers remain guardians. As the child matures, custody may be transferred, but the guiding principle is now the welfare of the child rather than rigid age thresholds. Where parents were never married, the law does not recognise a relationship between them, though the child retains rights against the father once paternity is established.

For non-Muslims, both the federal Civil Personal Status Law of 2022 and Abu Dhabi’s Civil Family Court legislation have replaced the custody–guardianship dichotomy with the principle of joint parental responsibility. Article 25 of Abu Dhabi’s Regulation No. 8 of 2022 provides that following divorce, both parents shall share equally in legal and physical custody until the child reaches sixteen, at which point the child may elect with whom to reside. The court may alter this arrangement only where it is shown to be contrary to the child’s interests. Where the parents were never married, no parental rights exist between them, although once paternity is acknowledged, the father’s duty to maintain the child and the mother’s role as custodian are established.

Jurisdiction is determined by the same principles that apply to divorce: residence, domicile, or the situs of property. For Muslims, the federal personal status courts are competent where the child resides in the Emirates or where the parents are domiciled there. For non-Muslims, the civil regimes apply similar criteria. Abu Dhabi’s Regulation No. 8 of 2022 provides that the Civil Family Court is competent where the child is habitually resident in Abu Dhabi, where the divorce was granted there, or where one parent is domiciled or employed in the Emirate. The approach throughout is statutory rather than discretionary: once the jurisdictional thresholds are met, the court must accept the case.

For Muslims, contact is regulated by the personal status courts, which may order visitation in accordance with the welfare of the child. The law confers a right of contact upon the noncustodial parent, and the court has discretion to regulate its frequency and conditions. The guiding principle under the new federal law is no longer adherence to rigid rules of age and gender, but rather the child’s welfare and stability.

For non-Muslims, the default of joint custody obviates the need for visitation in the traditional sense. Each parent is entitled to equal time, and if the parents cannot agree, the court imposes a schedule. Weekly, fortnightly and monthly alternations are common, with holidays and school breaks divided equally. The lodestar of the civil system is the child’s best interests, which are interpreted to include academic stability, emotional security and continuity of lifestyle. At the age of sixteen in Abu Dhabi, the child is given a right of election. The court may also appoint a social expert to ascertain the child’s views, particularly where there is conflict. The child’s voice is heard through this mechanism, though always filtered through the principle that welfare is paramount.

Relocation is a delicate subject. For Muslims, the federal personal status law prohibits the custodian from removing the child from the jurisdiction without the guardian’s consent or the court’s permission. The principle is that a child should not be uprooted without judicial scrutiny. The new law of 2024 introduces the possibility for either parent to apply for permission to relocate permanently, thereby softening the father’s historic veto and aligning the law more closely with international standards.

For non-Muslims, Article 37 of Abu Dhabi’s Regulation No. 8 of 2022 provides that neither parent may travel abroad with the child without the other’s consent or a court order. The court may impose safeguards for the child’s return, such as a financial bond. Applications for relocation are framed as requests for travel authorisation, and the court considers the effect upon the child’s welfare, education and stability. Though the statutory language was drafted with temporary travel in mind, practitioners now use it as the vehicle for permanent relocation requests. The guiding principle is once again the best interests of the child, assessed pragmatically.

Foreign custody and contact orders may be recognised under the Civil Procedure Code provided they are final, the foreign court was competent, and the order does not contravene UAE public order or the welfare of the child. In practice, the UAE courts are cautious. They will not enforce a foreign order that conflicts with the presumption of joint custody for non-Muslims, nor one that undermines the welfare of a child under the Muslim scheme. Courts may, however, register “mirror orders”, reproducing the terms of a foreign judgment where they are consistent with local law, thereby giving them enforceability in the Emirates. The child’s best interests remain the ultimate safeguard, and the court will refuse recognition where a foreign order is inconsistent with them.

The United Arab Emirates is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980. This absence is of profound significance. It means that there is no automatic treaty-based mechanism for the swift return of children who are wrongfully removed to or retained in the country, and no central authority charged with coordinating cross-border returns. Instead, cases of alleged abduction fall to be determined under domestic law, and foreign return orders are not directly enforceable. They may be placed before a UAE court as evidence, but the local judge will make an independent assessment according to UAE statutes and public policy.

For Muslims, the relevant framework is Federal Law No. 41 of 2024. It preserves the classical distinction between guardianship and custody, while modernising the rules with a clearer emphasis on the child’s welfare. Under this law, a custodial parent may not take a child abroad without the consent of the guardian or an order of the court. Article 116 requires the non-custodial parent’s written consent before travel, and courts are empowered to impose conditions, including the provision of financial guarantees, to secure the child’s return. The new law also creates criminal liability for removing a child abroad in breach of an order or without the requisite consent, marking a more robust stance against unilateral removal.

For non-Muslims, both the federal Civil Personal Status Law of 2022 and the Abu Dhabi civil regime provide equivalent restrictions, though cast in secular terms. In Abu Dhabi, Regulation No. 8 of 2022 prohibits either parent from travelling internationally with a child without the other’s written consent or judicial approval, and the court may impose travel bans, require the surrender of passports, or demand security to prevent wrongful removal. These provisions, conceived as travel controls, have in practice begun to form the basis of relocation jurisprudence, enabling the court to authorise or refuse permanent moves abroad by reference to the child’s best interests.

In the absence of Hague obligations, the UAE courts will not simply order a child returned to his or her country of habitual residence. Instead, a wrongful removal is litigated as a custody dispute under domestic law, with the court determining anew where the child should reside. The welfare of the child, as defined by local law, is paramount, but that welfare is interpreted within the cultural and statutory confines of the jurisdiction. This can yield outcomes very different from those anticipated in Hague Convention states.

For practitioners, the lesson is clear. Preventive measures must be pursued vigorously: travel bans should be obtained where abduction is feared; passport custody should be addressed in orders; and mirror arrangements in both jurisdictions should be secured wherever possible. Once a child has left the country, remedies are limited, and cooperation across borders is ad hoc and uncertain. Until such time as the UAE accedes to the Hague Convention, international abduction cases will continue to be determined locally, with an emphasis on restraint in travel, protective interim measures, and judicial discretion grounded in the domestic principle of the child’s welfare.

The position on surrogacy in the United Arab Emirates has shifted dramatically in recent years. Historically prohibited and criminalised, surrogacy was legalised for non-Muslims in late 2023 through amendments to the federal law on medically assisted reproduction. The law now permits gestational surrogacy in tightly regulated circumstances. It is available only where medical necessity exists, such as infertility or medical risk to the intended mother, and only to non-Muslim couples. Muslim couples remain excluded by virtue of the principles of Islamic law.

The regime imposes strict conditions on surrogates. They must be UAE citizens or residents of good standing, fall within a prescribed age range, and demonstrate proven reproductive health. The use of donor gametes is prohibited; the embryo must be created from the gametes of the intended parents themselves. Commercial surrogacy remains unlawful: surrogates may be reimbursed for medical and reasonable living expenses but may not receive payment for profit.

Unmarried non-Muslim couples may now avail themselves of surrogacy if they obtain regulatory approval. Same-sex couples, however, are excluded, as same-sex unions are not recognised in UAE law and cannot form the legal relationship upon which parental rights would be conferred. Parentage is established by the intended parents signing an acknowledgment of lineage before the court, which secures their status as legal parents of the child and allows the child to acquire their nationality. The introduction of surrogacy reflects a striking modernisation, though always tempered by restrictions to align with local public policy.

Adoption in the conventional Western sense is not permitted under UAE law for Muslims, since it conflicts with the Islamic prohibition on severing lineage. For Muslims, the law recognises only kafala, a guardianship arrangement under which a child may be raised and cared for by another family without extinguishing the link to the biological parents.

For non-Muslims, the civil regimes take a more flexible approach. Abu Dhabi’s Civil Family Court and the federal Civil Personal Status Law allow for the recognition of foreign adoptions concluded abroad, provided they do not offend UAE public order. Expatriates who have lawfully adopted in their home countries may seek to register and enforce those arrangements in the Emirates. Within the UAE, however, there is no procedure for effecting an adoption de novo. The court may recognise guardianship or parental responsibility orders made abroad, but it does not create them itself.

Adoption or guardianship orders are not available to same-sex couples, since same-sex relationships are not recognised in law. Nor are they available to unmarried heterosexual couples as a unit, though an individual expatriate may in some circumstances seek recognition of a foreign order naming him or her as an adoptive parent. In all cases, the child’s welfare and the preservation of public order principles remain paramount.

The approach to non-court dispute resolution differs across the UAE’s parallel regimes. For Muslims, Federal Law No. 41 of 2024 preserves the long-standing requirement that divorces must first pass through the Family Guidance Committee. This stage is intended to provide a space for reconciliation or mediated settlement before proceedings are admitted to the personal status court. Although couched as a conciliatory measure, it is in practice mandatory, and parties cannot proceed to litigation without a certificate of non-settlement.

Agreements reached before the Committee are recorded in writing and, once ratified, have the force of a judicial order.

For non-Muslims, the philosophy is different. The federal Civil Personal Status Law of 2022 and Abu Dhabi’s civil family legislation both reject compulsory reconciliation, reflecting the secular principle that marriage is a contract terminable at will. Divorce petitions may be filed directly with the court without any preliminary mediation. Nevertheless, the courts retain powers to encourage settlement. Judges are authorised to record financial settlements or arrangements for children and to ratify them, giving them executory effect before the Execution Court. In practice, practitioners frequently negotiate settlements and present them to the court for approval, knowing that ratified agreements are enforceable like any judgment.

Beyond these formal mechanisms, parties may resort to private mediation or arbitration. Arbitration is more often used in financial disputes, particularly where pre- or post-nuptial agreements include arbitration clauses. Mediation is widely encouraged and may be conducted by accredited mediators or lawyers. In Abu Dhabi, the Judicial Department has embraced technological innovation with online dispute resolution platforms, enabling expatriates abroad to resolve matters remotely. What remains non-derogable is the court’s supervisory role in matters involving children. No mediated or arbitral arrangement can bind the court to accept terms that are contrary to the welfare of a child, which is a matter of public order.

Thus the culture of dispute resolution in the UAE reflects the duality of its systems: mandatory conciliation in the Muslim courts, voluntarism in the civil courts, but in both cases a willingness to recognise and enforce agreements once the court is satisfied that they are consistent with law and policy.

The United Arab Emirates has undergone a period of unprecedented reform in family law, and the pace of change shows little sign of abating. The most significant development is the entry into force of Federal Law No. 41 of 2024, which will from April 2025 replace the older personal status law for Muslims. This statute consolidates and modernises the Sharia-based regime, placing greater emphasis on the best interests of the child, softening procedural formalities, and introducing new provisions for relocation, joint custody and financial clarity. It is widely anticipated that further interpretive guidance from the courts will be needed, as judges begin to apply its provisions in practice.

For non-Muslims, the reforms of 2021 and 2022 created civil regimes of astonishing breadth, both federally and in Abu Dhabi. These have already established no-fault divorce, joint custody, equal inheritance and the enforceability of nuptial agreements. Yet they are embryonic, and the coming years are likely to bring judicial clarification and, in all probability, amendments to address ambiguities in translation and scope that have already been identified. One area ripe for reform is relocation: while the statutes allow parents to apply for permission to travel with a child, they do not expressly codify relocation as a distinct cause of action. Courts have begun to treat such applications as relocation petitions, but legislation may be expected to provide clarity.

Reproductive law is another field in flux. The legalisation of surrogacy for non-Muslims in 2023 was a striking liberalisation, but its detailed regulation is still emerging. Criteria for surrogates, rules for compensation, and safeguards for the welfare of children born through assisted reproduction are all areas in which further ministerial resolutions are anticipated. Similarly, the interaction between surrogacy and the civil family courts is yet to be fully tested, and reform may be needed to harmonise the two.

Finally, questions of international cooperation remain at the forefront. The UAE is not yet a signatory to the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction. Pressure has grown for accession, both to protect expatriate families and to reinforce the country’s reputation as an international hub. Should the UAE take that step, it would represent a profound reform in cross-border child protection.

The trajectory is clear: the UAE is moving steadily toward a system of family law that is secular for non-Muslims, modernised for Muslims, and aligned as far as possible with international norms, while always preserving the boundary of public order that ensures fidelity to the state’s constitutional identity.

Family proceedings in the United Arab Emirates are by default conducted in private. This applies both to the federal personal status courts for Muslims and to the civil family courts established for non-Muslims. The rationale is twofold: to preserve the dignity of the parties in highly personal disputes, and to protect the welfare and privacy of children. Hearings are therefore closed to the public, and members of the press do not have the right of attendance.

Judgments, however, are delivered in writing and may be published in anonymised form. This is particularly the case in Abu Dhabi, where the Civil Family Court issues bilingual decisions in Arabic and English. Such judgments are intended not for public sensationalism but for the development of jurisprudence and the reassurance of practitioners and litigants that the law is applied consistently. The federal courts likewise produce written decisions, though these are generally available only to the parties and their counsel unless selected for inclusion in official law reports.

The culture is therefore one of discretion: privacy is paramount in the hearing of family cases, but transparency is maintained through the careful dissemination of judgments, often with the names and identifying details removed. In this way, the system balances confidentiality for families with the need for predictability and accountability in the development of family law.

For Muslims, succession remains governed by the fixed shares of Islamic law as codified in Federal Law No. 41 of 2024. Divorce has a direct effect upon entitlement: once the marriage is dissolved and the waiting period of the idda has expired, a former spouse ceases to qualify as an heir. The law does not permit spouses to contract out of these entitlements in advance, for inheritance rights are deemed matters of public order. A divorced wife will therefore not inherit from her former husband unless his death occurs during the idda following a revocable divorce, in which case her entitlement endures.

For non-Muslims, the civil regimes have created a very different landscape. Both Federal Law No. 41 of 2022 and Abu Dhabi’s Civil Family Court legislation allow expatriates full testamentary freedom. A non-Muslim testator may choose the law of his or her nationality to govern succession, or may rely on the default civil intestacy rules, which provide for equal shares between male and female heirs. Relationship breakdown intersects with these provisions in several ways. First, divorce extinguishes any claim a former spouse might have under the intestacy rules. Secondly, the availability of registered civil wills, particularly in Abu Dhabi, means that individuals are advised to update their testamentary dispositions promptly after separation or divorce, to ensure that property devolves according to their revised intentions.

The civil courts treat registered wills as binding, and the Abu Dhabi Judicial Department maintains a dedicated bilingual registry. Where no will exists, intestacy rules apply, dividing the estate between surviving family members without distinction of gender. For expatriates who divorce, the practical consequence is clear: they must amend their wills to prevent an ex-spouse from benefitting inadvertently, or alternatively rely upon the intestacy regime which will not recognise an ex-spouse as heir in any event.

Thus the impact of relationship breakdown upon estate planning is profound. For Muslims, divorce severs inheritance rights in accordance with Sharia. For non-Muslims, divorce removes the ex-spouse from the intestacy line but places a premium on ensuring that registered wills are kept up to date, so that estate planning reflects the altered family reality.