IP Provisions of a Free Trade Agreement between the Gulf Cooperation Council and the UK

By Commander Leroy Chiao - NASA website, Public Domain,
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=397518

 

Jane Lambert

Negotiations for a free trade agreement between the British government and the Gulf Cooperation Council have been underway since 2022.  According to the Minister of State for Trade Policy and Economic Stability, negotiations have covered services, investment and digital technologies as well as trade in goods (see Free Trade Agreement with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC): Update on Continuous Negotiations Statement made on 18 December 2024 Statement UIN HCWS333).

In June 2022, shortly before the negotiations began, the Department for International Trade published UK-Gulf Cooperation Council Free Trade Agreement UK’s Strategic Approach.  Although it was the work of the previous government, that publication has never been revoked, superseded or amended.  It is therefore reasonable to suppose that it reflects the present administration's thinking.

Chapter 3 sets out the government's objectives, which include:

"Intellectual property 

• Protect the UK’s existing IP standards. 
• Ensure rights holders receive protection and fair remuneration for the use of their works abroad, whilst ensuring reasonable and fair access for consumers. 
• Achieve an effective balance between rewarding research and innovation, whilst refecting wider public interests such as ensuring access to medicines. 
• Secure adequate protection for brands and design intensive goods, whilst keeping the market open to fair competition. 
• Promote the accessible, transparent, effective, and effcient enforcement of IP rights, including for online IP infringement, and facilitate cross-border collaboration on IP matters.
• Promote cooperation on an approach on geographical indications which ensures consumers are not misled about the origins of goods, while ensuring they have access to a range of products. 
• Promote provisions which take account of emerging opportunities and challenges in the digital age.
• Ensure consistency with the UK’s existing international obligations, including the European Patent Convention, to which the UK is party to."

An inkling of the provisions that could be agreed is indicated by art 5.1 of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Free Trade Association and the Gulf Cooperation Council Member States:

"ARTICLE 5.1 

Protection of Intellectual Property Rights 

1. For the purpose of this Chapter, "intellectual property" comprises copyright, including copyright in computer programmes and compilations of data, as well as neighbouring rights, trademarks for goods and services, geographical indications, industrial designs, patents, plant varieties, topographies of integrated circuits, as well as undisclosed information within the meaning of Article 39 of the WTO Agreement onTrade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (hereinafter referred to as “theTRIPS Agreement”). 

2. The Parties shall ensure adequate, effective and non-discriminatory protection of intellectual property rights, including effective means of enforcing such rights against infringement thereof, in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. 

3. Each Party shall accord to the nationals of the other Parties treatment no less favorable than that it accords to its own nationals with regard to the protection of intellectual property rights. Exemptions from such obligation must be in accordance with exceptions provided for under Articles 3 and 5 of the TRIPS Agreement. 

4. The Parties shall grant to each other’s nationals treatment no less favourable than that accorded to nationals of any other country. Exemptions from this obligation must be in accordance with the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement, in particular Articles 4 and 5 thereof.

 5. The Parties agree, upon request of any Party to review this Chapter in the Joint Committee in order to avoid or remedy trade distortions and to improve the level of protection. If problems in the area of intellectual property protection affecting trading conditions were to occur, urgent consultations shall take place in the Joint Committee at the request of a Party, with a view to reaching mutually satisfactory solutions. 

6. The Parties shall not later than two years after the entry into force of this Agreement conclude negotiations on an Annex containing further provisions on the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights. "

As I argued in DIFC IP Law Update 2025 on 24 Jan 2025, the DIFC Intellectual Property Law (DIFC Law No. 4 of 2019) appears to provide a high level of protection for intellectual property owners who fall within the jurisdiction of the DIFC courts.  They have the option of complaining to the Commissioner of Intellectual Property under art 59 (3) (a) of the IP Law and art 2 of The DIFC Intellectual Property Regulations or bringing an infringement action in the Court of First Instance. Where it is not possible to persuade a local licensee or other contracting party to accept English law and the jurisdiction of the English courts, a DIFC choice of law and jurisdiction clause would be the next best thing.

Anybody wishing to discuss this topic may call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 or send me a message through my contact form.

Reem Al Marzouqi - an Emirati inventor

Jane Lambert

I an grateful to Mr Mohamed Al Hemairy, Head of Intellectual Property & Patent Commercialization at the United Arab Emirates University, for bringing Aamera Jiwaji's article Patent Experience 23 Dec 2014 BQ to my attention.  It is about a young woman called Reem Al Marzouqi who has invented means of driving a car without hands. 

According to the article:

"More than a year has passed since a shy Emirati student and her two colleagues of UAE University made international headlines for inventing a system that allows a disabled person to drive a vehicle using only their feet. But little has happened in the last three years, despite her university’s best efforts to facilitate the process, spotlighting whether the GCC is truly ready to become a regional hub for innovation and intellectual property matters."

The University saw the potential of Reem's invention and allocated two mechanical engineering students and their supervisor to assist her. Applications have been filed for patents in the USA, European Patent Office, China and Japan though apparently not the Gulf Co-operation Council Parent Office.

Those patent applications must have cost a lot of money and their maintenance and enforcement will cost a great deal more. The work that has been carried out by the mechanical engineering students and supervisor will also have come at a cost though they will all have gained valuable product development experience. Unless and until a manufacturer or user applies for a licence to work Reem's invention there is a risk that this investment will not be recovered.

Yet even if that happens it is no reason to doubt the GCC states' capacity to become "a regional hub for innovation and intellectual property matters." The fact that Reem came up with the idea in the first place indicates that there are talented young men and women in the region. The University's willingness to invest in the invention is also to the region's credit. Reem's experience is one that has been shared by countless private inventors throughout the world including the UK and USA. I can say that from bitter experience because I have set up and chaired inventors clubs in Leeds, Liverpool and Sheffield, run IP clinics throughout the UK and spent most of my career advising and representing start-ups and other small and medium enterprises.

Reem's problem is that she is an independent inventor and not a member of a major vehicle manufacturer or other big institution's research and development department. If you look at page 9 of the UK Intellectual Property Office's publication Facts and Figures you will notice names like IBM, HP, Schlumberger and Rolls Royce in the table of top 10 patentees. The patent system in most countries (if not every country of the world) is designed to assist big businesses. It is very tough indeed for anyone else to get a look in. The remark attributed to Ralph Waldo Emerson "Build a better mousetrap, and the world will beat a path to your door" is simply not true. And to be fair to Emerson what he actually said was:

"If a man has good corn or wood, or boards, or pigs, to sell, or can make better chairs or knives, crucibles or church organs, than anybody else, you will find a broad hard-beaten road to his house, though it be in the woods."

Having said that it was not necessary a bad thing to apply for a patent or other intellectual property right for a useful invention like Reem's but applying for a patent for an invention and then licensing it is putting the cart before the horse.

Intellectual property exists to protect investment in branding, design, technology and works of art and literature but does not necessarily stimulate it. What stimulates such investment is the promise of a return through the use or sale of an invention, the publication of a blockbuster novel and so on.  When I am asked to advise a new business on patenting or other IP protection I take the entrepreneur through the following exercise:

• Identify the revenue streams for your business over the period of your business plan;
• Consider the threats to each of those revenue streams;
• What counter-measures can you take to avert those threats.

In most cases the threats are commercial - a competing product, a technical advance or changing consumer spending - and in most instances so are the countermeasure - reducing your prices, developing new products or services or finding new markets. Only very rarely is obtaining legal protection (that is to say a patent or other intellectual property right) the main answer. Even then a patent may not be the best answer because there are other forms of legal protection for new products and services such as the law of confidence which protects trade secrets or in the UK unregistered design right. Such alternatives are often unregistered rights and therefore free.

So what should Reem do now that she or her University has spent a lot of money on developing and patenting her invention? The obvious thing is to find a market and that is most likely to be found in a highly developed country with its own motor manufacturing industry with high welfare spending for disabled persons. I have no idea whether there is a market here but I do know that there is a scheme to adapt motor vehicles for disabled persons called Motability in the UK. There are probably bigger and better schemes in other countries. If I were Reem I would be exploring all those possibilities and perhaps also talking to the motor manufacturers.

Perhaps Reem, Mr Al Hemairy or someone else at the UAEU has thought of all that and done all these things. If so, excuse my impertinence. But if not, it's an idea isn't it and this article may help other inventors  in the GCC. If any of those inventors or entrepreneurs wants to discuss this article he or she can call me on +44 20 7404 5252 during office hours (remembering that we have 3 public holidays between now and 2 Jan 2015) or send me a message through my contact form. 

I should like to wish Reem, her helpers and university all the best and urge them not to be discouraged. There's plenty of scope for enterprise and innovation in the GCC states. The rest of the world owes a great debt of gratitude to the Arab world for the work of its scholars and scientists in the past. The fact that we use 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 rather than I, II, III, IV and V for counting is a constant reminder of that debt. There is no reason why the GCC - indeed the whole Middle East North Africa region - could not be a great source of ideas and technology again.

The UAE's Bilateral Investment Treaties

A bilateral investment treaty ("BIT") is an agreement between two governments on the terms by which the nationals of each contracting party may invest in the territory of the other.   A typical BIT will oblige each government to accept investments from the nationals of the other, to treat such investments no less favourably than those of its own nationals or those of the investors of any other country, not to expropriate such investments without adequate compensation and to submit any dispute with an investor to arbitration through the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes ("ICSID").

BITs have existed for over 40 years but their potency first emerged in a claim by the US waste disposal company Metalclad Insulation Corporation ("Metalclad") against the Mexican government for compensation for the the refusal by the local and state authorities of permission to use a landfill site that Metalclad had acquired near the small town of Guadalcázar, San Luis Potosi for the disposal of toxic waste. Metalclad claimed that the refusal of planning permission amounted to "expropriation" of the landfill site and in their award of 30 Aug 2013 the arbitrators held that the company was right. They ordered the Mexican government to pay Metalclad US$16,685,000. Mexico challenged the award in the courts of British Columbia which was the province in which the arbitrators had sat and won a modest reduction of the damages but the result was seen as a victory for a medium size company against a sovereign government.

Since Metalclad there has been a spate of claims by private companies against states under BITs and some of these relate to intellectual property.   Legislation by the governments of Uruguay and Australia to discourage smoking by requiring cigarette companies to package cigarettes with graphic warnings in the case of Uruguay and plain packaging in the case of Australia have been challenged by the tobacco giant Philip Morris under Uruguay's BIT with Switzerland and Australia's with Hong Kong for expropriation of the multinational's trade marks in those countries. In the claim against Uruguay the arbitrators have recently decided that they have jurisdiction to entertain the claim (see their decision of 2 July 2013 to that effect).   In the claim against Australia the case is proceeding in the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague. Both sides have instructed counsel, the claimants members of the English Bar and the Australians barristers from Australia (see the notice on the PCA's website and Philip Morris's press release of 21 Nov 2011.

The latest claim for compensation in respect of intellectual property is Eli Lilly & Co's for C$500 million against the Canadian government for the invalidation by the Canadian courts of two of its Canadian pharmaceutical patents.   Eli Lilly complains that the Canadian courts have developed a doctrine on utility called the "promise doctrine" which exists nowhere else in the world and results in the invalidation of patents that would be allowed elsewhere.  In Eli Lilly's submission such invalidation amounts to expropriation of its patents without adequate compensation and it has served a notice of intent to claim dated 13 June 2013.  I have written a short article on the claim in "Biting Back: Claiming Compensation from Foreign Governments under Bilateral Investment Treaties for Failing to provide Adequate IP Protection" 27 July 2013 as well as a more detailed article that has been accepted for publication in the EIPR.

In my article for the EIPR I have argued that if the invalidation of Eli Lilly's patents and indeed the refusal of planning permission for the use of Metlclad's landfill site amounts to "expropriation" then so too would the failure by a government to provide adequate intellectual property protection.   In this regard, it is worth remembering that the United Arab Emirates has 24 BITs including agreements with the following brand owing and design and technology exporting states:

• Austria
• China
• Finland
• France
• Germany
• Italy
• South Korea
• Switzerland, and
• the UK.

It is of course worth remembering that BITs can work both ways.   The UAE has BITs with newly industrializing countries such as Bangladesh, Malaysia, Turkey and Vietnam where the Emirati interest is likely to be similar to those of investors from developed states. Similarly, Emiratis have substantial investments in stocks and real estate in London and other European capitals to which these BITs apply.

Should anyone wish to discuss this article, BITs in general or a particular issue call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 during office hours London time or fill out my contact form.   You can also follow me on Facebook, Linkedin, twitter or Xing.

UAE Trade Mark Law

Obligation under TRIPS to protect Trade Marks
As a party to the World Trade Organization, the United Arab Emirates is bound by Annex 1C to the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization which is better known as TRIPS (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights).

Art 15 (1) of TRIPS requires member states to provide that:

"Any sign, or any combination of signs, capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings, shall be capable of constituting a trademark. Such signs, in particular words including personal names, letters, numerals, figurative elements and combinations of colours as well as any combination of such signs, shall be eligible for registration as trademarks."

Art 16 (1) further provides:

"The owner of a registered trademark shall have the exclusive right to prevent all third parties not having the owner’s consent from using in the course of trade identical or similar signs for goods or services which are identical or similar to those in respect of which the trademark is registered where such use would result in a likelihood of confusion. In case of the use of an identical sign for identical goods or services, a likelihood of confusion shall be presumed. The rights described above shall not prejudice any existing prior rights, nor shall they affect the possibility of Members making rights available on the basis of use."

Other provisions of the treaty set out the conditions for registration, enforcement and licensing and assignment.

UAE Trade Mark Legislation
The UAE's obligations under TRIPS are implemented by Federal Law No. 37 of 1992 on Trademarks as amended by Law No. 19 of 2000 and Law No. 8 of 2002 (see Jane Lambert "The Legal Order of the United Arab Emirates" 12 Nov 2011).  It therefore applies throughout the Emirates including Dubai and its free zones including the Dubai International Financial Centre which also has its own private law of passing off (see Jane Lambert "The DIFC Law of Passing Off" 7 April 2011).

The Register
Art 5 of the Law establishes a trade mark registry in the Ministry of Economy and Commerce:

"wherein shall be recorded all the trade marks, names, addresses and type of activities of their owners, the descriptions of their goods, products or services and any conveyance, assignment, transfer of ownership, mortgage or licence for use concerning such marks or any other changes."

Registrable Marks
Art 2 provides that

"anything having a distinctive form such as names, words, signatures, letters, figures, drawings, logos, titles, hallmarks, seals, pictures, engravings, advertisements, packs or any other mark or group of marks if used or intended to be used either to distinguish goods, products or services whatever their source or to indicate that the goods or products belong to the trade mark's owner due to its manufacturing, selection or trading or to indicate the rendering of a service"

shall be considered a trade mark.   Art 3 excepts from registration signs having the following characteristics:

"1. The mark having no property or distinctive character or that made of data being only the name given by tradition to familiar goods, products, services or the ordinary drawings and pictures of goods and products.
2. Any mark breaching the public morals or violating the public order.
3. Public emblems, flags and other logos, of the State, the Arab or international organizations or an institution thereof or any foreign country except by its authorization as well as any imitation of such emblems, flags or logos.
4. Logos of the Red Crescent or Red Cross and such other similar symbols and the marks being an imitation thereof.
5. Marks that are identical or similar to symbols having a purely religious character.
6. Geographical names if their use would create confusion with regard to the origin or source of goods, products and services.
7. The name, title, picture or logo of a third party unless he or his heirs approve its use beforehand.
8. Particulars of honorary degrees to which a registration applicant does not prove his legal entitlement.
9. Marks that may mislead the public or include mistreatments on the origin or source of products or services or their other properties as well the marks that include a fictitious, imitated or forged trade name.
10. Marks owned by natural persons or legal entities with whom it is prohibited to deal.
11. The mark whose registration for some categories of products or services results in undervaluing other products or services distinguished by such mark.
12. Marks including the following words or expressions :
Concession, Concessionaire, Registered, Registered Drawing, Copyright, Imitation is Considered Forgery or such similar words and expressions.
13. The national and foreign medals, coins and bank notes.
14. The marks deemed as just a translation for a renown mark or another mark already registered, if the registration would confuse the consumers, with regard to products distinguished by the mark or similar products."

These are what we would call in Europe "absolute grounds of refusal.".   Art 4 also excludes:

"1. The trademarks having an international goodwill beyond the boundaries of the mother country, may not be registered unless authorized by the owner or by his official attorney.
2. It is the public's awareness about the trademark that determines its goodwill.
3. A trademark with a goodwill, may not be registered to distinguish products or services that are not similar or compliant with those distinguished by the trademark if:

a. The use of the trademark indicated a link between the goods and services to be distinguished and the goods or services of the original trademark owner.
b. The use led to a potential prejudice to the owner of the original trademark owner."

Art 10 further provides:

"Subject to the provisions of Art. 26 hereof, no trade mark identical or similar to an already registered mark may be registered for the same categories of products or services, or different goods or services, if the use of the requested trademark would generate an impression that such goods or services are linked to the goods or services of the owner of the registered mark or prejudicing his interests.
Should one or more persons apply simultaneously for the registration of the same mark or close or similar marks for one category of products or services, the Ministry shall suspend the registration of all applications until an attested waiver is submitted by the opponents in favour of one of them or a final judgment is awarded in favour of one of them."

Finally, art 26 excludes from registration a trade mark that is struck off for years 3 years fron the date of striking off.

Registration
As is the case everywhere, trade marks are registered in the UAE for specified goods or services in accordance with Executive Regulations (art 7). Applications for registration are examined within 30 days of filing (art 11 (1)).

If an application is refused the applicant has 30 days to appeal to a committee consisting of representatives of the Minister of Economy and Commerce and two from the Chamber of Commerce ("the Committee") and from there to the Court under art 12 (2).

If an application is accepted it is published in the Ministry's Trade Marks Bulletin and in two Arabic language daily newspapers. Those who object to the application have 30 days in which to give notice of their objection.  Such notice is then sent to the applicant who is invited to reply.  The Ministry considers the parties submissions under art 15 and decides whether to entertain the opposition or to allow the application to proceed to grant and, if so, on what terms. Any party dissatisfied with the Ministry's decision may appeal to the Committee and thence to the court

If a mark is registered registration takes effect from the date of filing (art 16). The same article provides that the registered proprietor is given a certificate containing the following particulars:

"1. Registration number of the mark.
2. Date of submission of application and date of registration.
3. Trade name or name, nationality and domicile of the mark owner.
4. Duplicate of the mark.
5. Description of the products, goods or services for which the mark is designated and their category.
6. Number and date of the international priority right and name of the State Member in Paris Convention for the Protection of the Industrial Property, where the priority right application has been lodged."

Effect of Registration
Art 17 (2) provides that

" The owner of a registered trademark may prevent others from using a similar or identical trademark, to distinguish products or services that are identical, similar or correlated for which the mark has been registered, in such a way that confuses the consumers."

Once a trade mark has been used continuously for 5 years of the date of registration without any challenge as  to validity title to the mark may not be disputed (art 17 (1)).

A mark may be registered for 10 years and may be renewed indefinitely for further periods of 10 years for so long as it is used.

Infringement
A trade mark is infringed if the same or similar mark is used for gods that are the same or similar to those for which the mark is registered.  Infringement of a trade mark is both a criminal offence and a breach of statutory duty.  The penalty for trade mark infringement is a fine, prison or both.   Interim and final injunctive relief and damages are available to trade mark owners against infringers. Infringing goods may be seized before the commencement of civil or criminal proceedings.

Further Information
Our chambers is developing a presence in the United Arab Emirates and has recently recruited a resident tenant. If you require advice on any aspect of intellectual property or technology law including licensing and franchising or representation before the DIFC Courts or any arbitration, contact Stephen Broom on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 or fill out our contact form.

Gulf Co-operation Council Member States - Treaties and Intellectual Property Authorities

Country	Treaties and Conventions	Intellectual Property Office
Bahrain	Berne, Brussels, Madrid Protocol, Paris, Patent Co-operation, Patent Law, Rome, Trademark Law, TRIPS, WIPO Copyright, WIPO Performances and Phonograms	Ministry of Industry and Commerce P.O. Box 5479 Manama Bahrain +973 17530335
Kuwait	TRIPS	Ministry of Trade and Industry Trademarks and Patents Department P.O. Box 2944 Safat 13030 Kuwait +965 22 42 4426
Oman	Berne, Brussels, Budapest, Hague, Madrid Protocol, Nairobi, Paris, Patent Co-operation, Patent Law, Trademark Law, TRIPS, UPOV, WIPO Copyright, WIPO Performances and Phonograms	Ministry of Commerce and Industry P.O. Box 550 Code No. 113 Muscat Oman+968 247 741 26 / 992 226 22
Qatar	Berne, Nairobi, Paris, Patent Co-operation, TRIPS, WIPO Copyright, WIPO Performances and Phonograms	Intellectual Property Center Ministry of Justice P.O. Box 917 Doha Qata +974 448 42 292
Saudi Arabia	Berne, Paris, TRIPS	General Directorate of Industrial Property, King Abdul-Aziz City for Science and Technology (KACST) P.O. Box 6086 Riyadh 11442 +9661 481 4342
United Arab Emirates	Berne, Paris, Patent Co-operation, Rome, TRIPS, WIPO Copyright, WIPO Performances and Phonograms	Directorate of Industrial Property, Ministry of Economy and Commerce P.O. Box 901 Abu Dhabi +971 2 613 1336

The Legal Order of the United Arab Emirates

I have written several articles on Dubai ("Why Dubai or the Rest of the Gulf for that Matter", 14 Jan 2011), the Dubai International Financial Centre ("DIFC"), "The DIFC Courts", 7 Jan 2011, their jurisdiction (Corinth Pipeworks SA v Barclays Bank Plc 20 March 2011) and rules of court (12 May 2011), the DIFC laws of confidence (27 Jan 2011), passing off (7 April 2011) and data protection (1 Aug 2011) and the new dispute resolution policy for .ae domain names (22 Jan 2011). Dubai is, of course, a member of the United Arab Emirates ("UAE") and it is high time for me to discuss the legal context in which the DIFC is set.

The UAE

The UAE is a federation of the following hereditary monarchies or emirates:

• Abu Dhabi
• Ajman
• Dubai
• Fujairah
• Ras al-Khaimah
• Sharjah, and
• Umm al-Quwain.

These emirates have a combined population of 8.26 million in a land area of 83,600 square kilometres. Their federal capital is Abu Dhabi.

UAE's Constitution

The UAE's constitution was adopted by the rulers of the emirates on 2 Dec 1971. Art 1 describes the Union as "an independent, sovereign, federal state" which "any other independent Arab country may join". Art 6 declares that:

"The Union is a part of the Great Arab Nation to which it is bound by the ties of religion, language, history and common destiny .

The people of the Union are one people, and one part of the Arab Nation."

Art 3 declares that

"The member Emirates shall exercise sovereignty over their own territories and territorial waters in all matters, which are not within the jurisdiction of the Union as assigned in this Constitution."

However, art 2 provides that the Union is to exercise sovereignty in matters assigned to it by the constitution throughout the territories of the emirates. Art 4 precludes the cession of that sovereignty.

Aims of the UAE

The aims of the Union as set out in art 10 are as follows:

• the maintenance of the UAE's independence and sovereignty
• safeguarding its security and stability
• the defence against any aggression upon its existence or the existence of its member states
• the protection of the rights and liabilities of the people of the Union
• the achievement of close co–operation between the emirates for their common benefit in realising these aims and in promoting their prosperity and progress in all fields
• the provision of a better life for all citizens together with respect by each emirate for the independence and sovereignty of the other emirates in their internal affairs within the framework of the constitution.

Economic Union

Art 11 establishes an "economic and customs union" between the emirates with free movement of capital and goods. Free movement of labour is implicit in art 8 which provides that the citizens of the Union shall have a single nationality.

Institutions

Art 45 establishes the following federal institutions:

1. Supreme Council,
2. President and his Deputy,
3. Council of Ministers,
4. Federal National Council, and
5. the Union Judiciary.

Supreme Council

The Supreme Council consists of the rules of the emirates or their deputies and is the highest authority of the Union (art 46). It exercises executive and legislative powers.

President

One of its most important functions of the rulers assembled in the Supreme Council is to choose the President and Vice-President from among their number pursuant to art 51. The President and Vice-President hold office for 5 years and exercise wide executive powers under art 54. However, a convention appears to be developing that the ruler of Abu Dhabi is ipso facto the President of the UAE. The incumbent is Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan who inherited that office from his father, the first President of the Union.

Council of Ministers

Art 55 of the constitution establishes a Council of Ministers consisting of a prime minister, a deputy prime minister and a number of ministers chosen from citizens of the UAE known for their competence and experience. The Council has responsibility for such matters as defence, foreign affairs, internal affairs, justice, posts and telecommunications, education and public health.

Federal National Council

Art 68 provides for a Federal National Council consisting of 40 members representing the emirates in rough proportion to their population. The Council constitutes the popular element of government though not necessarily a democratic one since art 69 allows each emirate to choose the method of selection of its representatives.

Union Judiciary

Art 95 establishes a Union Supreme Court and Union Primary Tribunals.

Legal System

In addition to the Union Judiciary, each emirate has its own courts. Except for the DIFC (which is a common law enclave) the legal system is based on civil or Roman law though Islamic law remains for family and inheritance matters.

Further Information

Anyone wishing to discuss this article should call me on 0800 862 0055 or get in touch by twitter, Linkedin, Facebook, or my contact form.