Introduction
Traditionally, judgments issued by the Court of Cassation in the United Arab Emirates have been treated as absolutely final, binding and immune from challenge. This doctrine of finality serves an important purpose by preserving judicial stability, preventing endless litigation and safeguarding the authority of the highest court. However, absolute finality may also, in rare but serious circumstances, allow judicial error, procedural irregularity or misapplication of law to persist without any legal remedy. In recognition of this delicate balance between stability and justice, the Dubai Court of Cassation has introduced a revolutionary procedural mechanism under Decision No. (16) of 2025 regulating the submission and adjudication of Requests for Rehearing before the Court of Cassation.
This reform introduces, for the first time in Dubai’s judicial system, a structured and narrowly confined avenue through which final Cassation judgments may be revisited under strict procedural safeguards, thereby ensuring that judicial finality does not become an obstacle to substantive justice.
Legal Foundation of the Rehearing Mechanism
The rehearing system is grounded in the Federal Decree-Law No. 42 of 2022 concerning Civil Procedures, which authorizes the creation of exceptional mechanisms to correct final judicial errors. Decision No. 16 of 2025 operationalizes this legislative mandate by establishing a comprehensive procedural framework governing the submission, review, admissibility and adjudication of rehearing applications. It also builds upon the judicial structure created under Decision No. 11 of 2023, which formed a special judicial panel dedicated exclusively to rehearing matters.
Through this framework, rehearing is no longer an undefined extraordinary remedy, but a codified legal procedure regulated by strict timelines, formal requirements, financial safeguards and judicial oversight.
Who May Request Rehearing
The right to seek rehearing is not open-ended. It is restricted to two specific categories. First, the litigant against whom a final Cassation judgment has been issued may submit a rehearing request, provided that all procedural requirements are fulfilled. Second, the President of the Court of Cassation retains an independent supervisory authority to initiate a rehearing referral where he determines that justice so requires. This dual gateway ensures that judicial correction may occur both upon application of the affected party and upon institutional judicial oversight.
The Rehearing Judicial Panel
One of the most significant features of the reform is the establishment of a special Rehearing Panel composed of five Cassation judges who did not participate in issuing the judgment sought to be reheard. This separation ensures impartiality, neutrality and independence in reviewing potential judicial error. The Rehearing Panel functions as a judicial safety mechanism designed to protect litigants from the risk of institutional bias and to preserve the credibility of Cassation jurisprudence.
Procedural Requirements and Timelines
The Request for Rehearing must be filed within one year from the date of issuance of the final Cassation judgment. This period is strictly enforced and reflects the legislator’s intention to balance judicial correction with procedural stability. Each judgment may be subjected to only one rehearing request, preventing repetitive or abusive litigation.
The request must be submitted through the Case Management Office of the Court of Cassation and must be signed by an advocate licensed to plead before the Cassation Court. This requirement ensures that only professionally prepared and legally grounded applications reach the Rehearing Panel.
In addition, a mandatory security deposit of AED 20,000 must be paid upon filing. This deposit serves as a filter mechanism to deter frivolous, tactical or malicious rehearing requests. Where the rehearing request is rejected, the deposit is confiscated. Where the request is accepted, the deposit is refunded to the applicant.
Judicial Outcome of Rehearing Requests
Upon reviewing the rehearing request, the Rehearing Panel issues a reasoned judicial decision. If the request is rejected, the Cassation judgment retains its full finality and enforceability. If the request is accepted, the matter is transferred to a different Cassation circuit for fresh adjudication on the merits. In such case, the previous Cassation judgment is effectively neutralized, and the case is reheard as though no prior Cassation ruling had been rendered.
This ensures that the correction of error is not merely symbolic but produces a real and substantive judicial remedy.
Presidential Supervisory Authority
Even where a rehearing request has been rejected, the President of the Court of Cassation retains the power to submit a referral for rehearing in exceptional circumstances. This authority represents the highest level of institutional judicial supervision and acts as a final safeguard against miscarriages of justice that may escape ordinary procedural remedies.
Impact on UAE Judicial Practice
Decision No. 16 of 2025 represents one of the most significant procedural evolutions in the UAE judicial system. It introduces accountability at the highest appellate level, strengthens public confidence in judicial fairness, and aligns UAE practice with advanced comparative judicial systems that recognize extraordinary remedies against final judgments in limited and regulated circumstances.
At the same time, it preserves judicial stability by strictly limiting rehearing to a single opportunity within a defined timeframe and by imposing financial and professional barriers to prevent abuse.
Conclusion
The introduction of the rehearing mechanism before the Dubai Court of Cassation is a transformative development in UAE civil justice. It affirms that while judicial finality is essential, justice must ultimately prevail over procedural rigidity. Decision No. 16 of 2025 establishes a refined balance between certainty and fairness, ensuring that grave judicial errors can be corrected while safeguarding the authority and stability of the Cassation Court.
This reform marks a decisive step toward a more accountable, transparent and equitable appellate system in the United Arab Emirates.
Authors:
