WRONGFUL ARREST CLAIMS IN PRACTICE
TYPICALLY, THE PROTECTION OF THE SHIPOWNER AGAINST SPURIOUS OR UMERITED ARREST CLAIMS LIES IN THE COURT’S INITIAL EXAMINATION OF THE CASE AT THE ARREST APPLICATION STAGE AND THE COURT’S ABILITY TO REJECT A CLAIM ON THAT BASIS. HOWEVER, THERE IS SCOPE UNDER ARTICLES 106, 282 & 292 OF UAE FEDERAL LAW NO. 5 OF 1985 ( THE “CTL”), READ CONJUNCTIVELY, FOR A DEFENDANT TO BRING A COMPENSATION CLAIM AGAINST THE ARRESTING PARTY WHERE THE ARREST WAS ‘WRONGFUL’. It is common knowledge in the UAE legal industry that a court deciding on an arrest application will require the arresting party to provide an undertaking, agreeing to indemnify a ship-owner against wrongful arrest. It is also common knowledge that claims for wrongful arrest rarely ever succeed and so such actions are rarely ever brought. The reasoning behind this is that the grounds for substantiating a wrongful arrest claim are far from transparent and the legal test to be applied is nebulous at best. Practice dictates the wrong