The Background
Our client, a UAE-based subcontractor specialising in oil and gas installation and manpower services, was engaged by a leading main contractor for a large-scale infrastructure project within the UAE. The parties executed two distinct purchase orders (POs) governing their contractual relationship:
-
- Purchase Order 1 (PO1): Installation and commissioning of fittings;
-
- Purchase Order 2 (PO2): Supply of skilled manpower for on-site activities.
The subcontractor successfully completed all works under PO1, which were duly certified and accepted by the main contractor. However, the main contractor abandoned the project midway, leaving substantial certified amounts unpaid.
Separately, under PO2, a dispute arose concerning the quality and efficiency of the manpower supplied. The main contractor alleged deficiencies and raised a counterclaim, asserting set-off against the outstanding payments under PO1.
The subcontractor was therefore faced with a two-pronged challenge — recovering the unpaid certified dues and defending against an unsubstantiated counterclaim, all within the context of a stalled project and mounting financial strain.
The Challenge
Three complex legal and commercial challenges defined this dispute:
-
- Jurisdictional Uncertainty:
The original contract stipulated Bahrain law as the governing law and ICC arbitration seated in Bahrain, despite both parties being UAE-based and the project being performed entirely in the UAE. This created an immediate obstacle to effective dispute resolution. - Commercial Urgency:
The non-payment under PO1 resulted in serious cash-flow stress for the subcontractor. The client required a mechanism for swift adjudication without incurring the high costs and procedural delays typical of conventional arbitration. - Counterclaim Complexity:
The main contractor’s allegations regarding manpower quality risked diluting or offsetting legitimate payment claims, requiring a disciplined evidentiary response to protect the client’s commercial interests.
- Jurisdictional Uncertainty:
Proceeding through a traditional ICC arbitration could have extended the matter to 18–24 months, incurring significant costs , a burden disproportionate to the dispute’s value and urgency.
Our Approach
Redefining the Legal Framework
ATB Legal initiated negotiations with the opposing party to amend the dispute resolution clause, replacing Bahrain law with UAE law and relocating the arbitration seat to Dubai (UAE).
This adjustment ensured the proceedings aligned with the parties’ operational base, project location, and governing legal environment — significantly improving enforceability and cost efficiency.
Selecting the ICC Expedited Procedure
Recognising that the dispute was documentary and low in quantum, our arbitration team proposed invoking the ICC Expedited Procedure under Article 30 and Appendix VI of the ICC Rules.
This mechanism permits:
-
- A sole arbitrator, even if the arbitration agreement provides otherwise;
-
- Elimination of hearings in favour of written submissions; and
-
- A six-month time limit for the final award.
This procedural route transformed what would have been a protracted arbitration into a six-month paper-based process, achieving significant savings in both time and cost.
Building the Evidentiary Core
ATB Legal constructed a tightly organised evidentiary record anchored on documentary precision. The claim and defence were supported by:
-
- Completion Certificates and Delivery Notes confirming acceptance of works under PO1;
-
- Site Logs, Daily Reports, and Photographs substantiating compliance and countering allegations of poor workmanship under PO2; and
-
- Invoice Schedules and Financial Records validating the amounts due and establishing the quantum of the claim.
This disciplined documentary approach allowed the case to proceed without oral testimony, maintaining clarity and coherence for the tribunal.
Procedural Discipline and Advocacy
The arbitration was conducted entirely in writing, requiring meticulous adherence to the compressed procedural timelines.
ATB Legal managed every phase with precision:
-
- Drafting the Terms of Reference,
-
- Preparing the Statement of Claim, Defence, and Rejoinders,
-
- Coordinating with the ICC Secretariat, and
-
- Maintaining transparent, timely exchanges with the opposing counsel.
The team’s diligence ensured there were no procedural defaults, preserving credibility and ensuring a persuasive presentation of facts and legal arguments.
Insights for Businesses
| KEY INSIGHTS | WHAT IT MEANS |
|---|---|
| Expedited ICC Arbitration is viable for small to mid-value disputes | The ICC Expedited Procedure provides a time-bound mechanism for disputes where facts are primarily documentary. |
| Documentary proceedings eliminate unnecessary hearings and witness evidence | Clear records — site logs, acceptance certificates, and correspondence — form the backbone of successful expedited cases. |
| Parties can amend the governing law and seat post-contract | Flexibility in arbitration agreements allows adaptation to commercial realities. |
| Procedural discipline ensures results | Adhering to the ICC’s condensed timetable prevents delay and enhances credibility before the tribunal. |
| Strategic legal counsel matters | The right procedural strategy can turn a protracted payment dispute into a fast-track success. |
