- within Litigation and Mediation & Arbitration topic(s)
- within Litigation and Mediation & Arbitration topic(s)
A recent judgment of the Qatar Financial Centre Civil and Commercial Court (First Instance Circuit), delivered by Justice Fritz Brand, L v M [2025] QIC (F) 67, offers useful clarity on a question that still arises with surprising frequency: can parties who are not QFC entities nevertheless anchor their arbitration in the QFC framework and seek assistance from the QFC Court?
The answer is yes, but the approach taken is crucial.
The issue in outline
The parties in L v M were both operating entities in Qatar outside the QFC. Their contract contained an arbitration clause referring disputes to arbitration under the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) Rules, with the seat stated as the Qatar International Court and Dispute Resolution Centre in the Qatar Financial Centre. Litigation in the local courts was ultimately overturned for lack of jurisdiction. That, in turn, prompted an application to the QFC Court for the appointment of an arbitrator.
That application raised a familiar but important issue: given that both parties were non-QFC entities, under which arbitration regime should the application be assessed, and on what basis could the QFC Court properly act.
The Cambridge case and what it does (and does not) prevent
The difficulty arises because the jurisdiction of the QFC Courts cannot be expanded by procedural rules or other secondary legislation. That principle was firmly established by the Court of Appeal in The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Cambridge v The Holding WLL [2025] QIC (A) 6.
As Justice Fritz Brand explains, however, that does not end the analysis.
The critical point is that Law No. 2 of 2017 Promulgating the Civil and Commercial Arbitration Law, which is primary legislation, expressly permits parties to designate the QFC Court as the competent court for arbitration. The Court further reasoned that where non-QFC parties have the option, under that Law, to elect the QFC Court as the competent court for arbitration in Qatar, that option extends to the QFC Arbitration Regulations regardless of whether any party is a QFC entity.
Why the application succeeded
Against that background, the Court construed the arbitration clause purposively. Although the QICDRC is not itself a legal seat of arbitration, it is inextricably tied to the QFC. The Court therefore construed the clause as choosing the QFC as the seat of the arbitration, governed by the QFC Arbitration Regulations.
That was sufficient to engage Article 14 of the QFC Arbitration Regulations, and the Court accordingly directed the Registrar to undertake the appointment of a sole arbitrator.
Why this matters
The judgment confirms that non-QFC parties are not necessarily excluded from a QFC-seated arbitration governed by the QFC Arbitration Regulations, provided the arbitration clause is properly construed as selecting a QFC seat. At the same time, it serves as a reminder that arbitration clauses are not boilerplate. Imprecise drafting may survive judicial scrutiny, but often at the cost of delay, expense, and avoidable jurisdictional disputes.
The door to QFC arbitration remains open, but it should be entered deliberately.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
