Civil Law and UAE: Simple Tort Liability Rules

1. Meaning of Tort Liability

Tort liability means civil liability arising when a person's act or omission causes legally recognised harm to another person, property, reputation, or financial interests.

In UAE civil-law terminology, the subject is generally dealt with under the broader concept of a “harmful act” rather than only the common-law word “tort.”

A simple formula is:

Harmful Act → Harm/Damage → Causation → Liability → Compensation

Under the current UAE Civil Transactions Law, Federal Decree-Law No. 25 of 2025, the harmful-act provisions are principally found in Articles 245–258. The new law came into force on 1 June 2026, replacing the former 1985 Civil Transactions Law. (UAE Legislation)

2. Basic Rule of Tort Liability

The central rule is found in Article 246 of the current Civil Transactions Law:

Every act causing harm to another obliges its perpetrator to compensate for the damage.

This is a broad civil-liability rule. It covers harmful conduct by a natural or legal person, subject to special legislation. (UAE Legislation)

Simple example

A negligently drives a vehicle and damages B's car.

The basic analysis is:

A's conduct → damage to B's car → causal connection → compensation.

3. Main Elements of Tort Liability

For examination purposes, remember:

A-D-C-L-R

A — Act or omission

There must be conduct capable of producing harm.

D — Damage

The claimant must have suffered legally recognised damage.

C — Causation

The damage must be connected to the defendant's conduct.

L — Liability

The applicable legal rules must make the defendant responsible.

R — Remedy

The injured person may receive compensation or another legally appropriate remedy.

This is a simplified framework; the precise requirements differ depending on the type of harmful act.

4. Article 245 — Scope of Harmful-Act Liability

Article 245 provides that, subject to liability rules contained in special legislation, the harmful-act chapter applies to liability arising from harmful acts committed by natural or legal persons.

It also states that civil liability does not prevent criminal liability where the conditions for criminal liability exist. A criminal penalty does not itself determine the scope of civil liability or the amount of civil compensation. (UAE Legislation)

Example

A company negligently causes damage to a customer's property.

The company may face:

civil liability for the damage;

potentially regulatory consequences;

and, where legally applicable, separate criminal liability.

These are legally distinct questions.

5. Article 247 — Direct and Causal Harm

Article 247 makes an important distinction between:

Direct harm

The defendant's act directly produces the harm.

Harm by causation

The defendant's conduct contributes to the circumstances producing the harm.

The current provision states that direct harm attracts liability without the same additional conditions applicable to harm by causation, while causation-based harm is subject to the statutory requirements concerning transgression, intention, or the act leading to harm. Where direct action and causation combine, the provision generally attributes the result to the direct actor. (UAE Legislation)

Simple example

Direct:

A deliberately breaks B's window.

Causal:

A creates a dangerous condition which subsequently causes B's property to be damaged.

The legal analysis differs because the law expressly distinguishes direct action from causative conduct.

6. Article 248 — Retaliatory Property Damage

Article 248 deals with a person whose property has been damaged by another.

The injured person cannot simply respond by destroying the other person's property.

If both parties damage one another's property, each may be liable for the property damage they caused. (UAE Legislation)

Example

A damages B's vehicle.

B cannot lawfully respond by damaging A's vehicle merely as retaliation.

If B nevertheless destroys A's vehicle, B may also incur civil liability.

7. Article 249 — External Causes

Article 249 provides an important defence.

A person may avoid compensation liability where they establish that the harm arose from an external cause beyond their control, such as:

act of God;

sudden accident;

force majeure;

act of a third party;

act of the injured person.

This is subject to situations where legislation or the agreement provides otherwise. (UAE Legislation)

Example

A proves that an unavoidable external event, entirely beyond A's control, caused the damage.

The court may therefore find that A is not liable under Article 249.

8. Article 250 — Lawful Self-Defence

A person who causes harm while lawfully defending:

themselves;

their honour;

their property;

another person's person, honour or property,

is not liable for that harm provided they do not exceed what is necessary.

If the person exceeds the necessary limits, compensation may be awarded to the extent considered appropriate by the court. (UAE Legislation)

Example

A person pushes an attacker away to prevent an immediate assault.

If the response remains within necessary limits, civil liability may not arise.

If the person continues using unnecessary force after the danger has ended, the legal position may change.

9. Article 251 — Attribution of the Act

Article 251 generally attributes the act to the person who actually performed it, rather than merely the person who ordered it, unless the actor was compelled.

It also contains a special rule concerning public officials acting under law or mandatory superior orders, subject to specified conditions concerning their belief in legality and due care. (UAE Legislation)

This provision is important because it asks:

Who legally committed the harmful act?

10. Article 252 — Avoiding Greater Harm

Article 252 deals with situations where a person causes harm while attempting to avert a greater imminent harm.

The person is generally not liable except to the extent the court considers appropriate, taking justice into account. (UAE Legislation)

Example

A breaks a locked door to rescue a person trapped inside a burning building.

Although the door is damaged, the conduct may be justified because it was undertaken to prevent a greater imminent danger.

11. Article 253 — Multiple Tortfeasors

Sometimes more than one person causes the same harm.

Article 253 provides that:

each responsible person may be liable according to their share;

the court may impose equal or joint-and-several liability;

compensation may be reduced or not awarded if the injured person contributed to causing or aggravating the harm. (UAE Legislation)

Example

Three contractors negligently cause damage to a building.

The court must consider:

each person's contribution;

the causal connection;

the claimant's own conduct;

the appropriate allocation of liability.

12. Contributory Conduct of the Injured Person

The claimant's own conduct can matter.

Suppose:

A creates a dangerous condition.

B sees the danger but deliberately increases the risk and suffers greater damage.

The court may consider B's contribution when assessing compensation under Article 253. (UAE Legislation)

Simple formula

Defendant's responsibility − claimant's contribution = potentially reduced compensation

The precise reduction is a matter for the applicable law and judicial assessment.

13. Moral Damage

Article 254 expressly recognises moral harm.

It includes infringement of matters such as:

freedom;

honour;

reputation;

social standing;

financial status.

The provision also permits compensation in specified circumstances for spouses and relatives up to the second degree for moral harm arising from incapacity or death of the injured person. (UAE Legislation)

Example

A person unlawfully damages another person's reputation.

The injured person may potentially seek compensation for the legally recognised moral harm, subject to proof and the applicable circumstances.

14. Assessment of Compensation

Article 255 provides that compensation is assessed according to:

the extent of the loss suffered; and

lost profit,

provided the loss of profit is a natural consequence of the harmful act. (UAE Legislation)

Thus:

Compensation = Proven loss + qualifying lost profit

The claimant should establish the damage rather than merely make a speculative claim.

15. Example of Tort Damages

Suppose A negligently damages B's business equipment.

B establishes:

repair cost: AED 50,000;

necessary additional expenses: AED 10,000;

proven business profit lost as a natural consequence: AED 20,000.

The court may consider the legally recoverable components of the loss.

The exact amount depends on:

evidence;

causation;

whether the loss is legally recoverable;

contribution by the claimant;

other statutory rules.

16. Tort Liability and Negligence

Negligence is one important form of harmful conduct.

A simple negligence structure is:

Duty/Care → Failure → Harm → Causation → Compensation

But UAE law should not simply be described as identical to common-law negligence.

The current Civil Transactions Law uses the broader harmful-act framework.

This distinction is particularly important in examinations.

17. Tort Liability vs Contractual Liability

Sometimes the same facts may raise both contractual and tort issues, but the legal basis must be identified carefully.

18. Six Important UAE/DIFC Case Laws

Because the current Civil Transactions Law only came into force on 1 June 2026, most reported UAE tort decisions were decided under the former 1985 Civil Transactions Law. Their legal principles may remain useful, but their old article numbers should not be presented as current provisions.

The following cases therefore need to be read with that qualification.

Case 1 — Dubai Court of Cassation Case No. 33 of 2019

This is an important mainland UAE authority on civil liability.

The principle quoted by the DIFC Court in BAM Higgs & Hill v Affan is that liability—whether contractual or tortious—requires the coexistence of the relevant elements of:

fault/breach;

damage; and

causal connection.

A breach or wrongful act by itself is not sufficient where damage has not been established. The burden of proving the alleged damage lies on the claimant. (DIFC Courts)

Principle

No proven damage + no causal connection = no complete claim for compensation.

19. Case 2 — Dubai Commercial Appeal No. 445/2020/1034

This Dubai appellate authority was also cited by the DIFC Court in BAM Higgs & Hill v Affan.

The court stated, in substance, that civil liability requires:

Fault + Damage + Causal Connection.

The causal connection may be challenged by establishing matters such as:

force majeure;

an external cause;

fault of the injured party;

conduct of a third party.

The trial court has authority to evaluate whether fault and causation have been established. (DIFC Courts)

Principle

Causation is an essential element of tort liability.

20. Case 3 — Shihab Khalil v Shuaa Capital PSC [2009] DIFC CFI 017

The DIFC Court considered negligence and explained that a claimant must establish both:

lack of due care; and

resulting loss caused by that carelessness.

The court emphasised that the resulting damage is an essential part of the cause of action. (DIFC Courts)

Principle

Carelessness without legally established resulting loss does not complete a negligence claim.

Importance

This case is useful for understanding:

negligence;

causation;

damage;

tort pleading.

21. Case 4 — Haya Spa LLC v Harper Real Estate / Hasan Real Estate [2016] DIFC SCT 150

This case provides a clear explanation of negligence.

The DIFC Court identified the essential elements under the DIFC Law of Obligations as:

duty of care;

breach of duty;

causation; and

loss/damages.

The court found that inaccurate information concerning the premises constituted a breach of the duty of care and examined whether the conduct was the factual and substantial cause of the claimant's losses. (DIFC Courts)

Principle

Duty + Breach + Causation + Damage = Negligence liability.

Important limitation

This is a DIFC case, applying DIFC legislation. It is not automatically binding on mainland UAE courts.

22. Case 5 — Ludiala v Lucaan Limited [2020] DIFC SCT 139

The claimant alleged psychological harm resulting from workplace conduct.

The DIFC Court considered medical evidence and found that the evidence did not adequately establish that the defendant caused the alleged psychological harm.

The court therefore emphasised that causation must be proved, rather than merely asserted. (DIFC Courts)

Principle

A claimant must connect the defendant's conduct to the alleged injury with sufficient evidence.

This is particularly important in:

personal injury;

medical claims;

psychological injury;

professional negligence.

23. Case 6 — Faizal Babu Moorkath v Expresso Telecom Group Ltd [2023] DIFC CFI 008

This case involved a counterclaim alleging negligence and substantial economic loss.

The DIFC Court explained that under the DIFC Law of Obligations, negligence requires:

a duty of care;

breach of that duty; and

conduct causing loss.

The court also emphasised that the claimant must first establish actionable loss. Without legally recognised loss, a negligence claim cannot succeed merely because wrongful conduct is alleged. (DIFC Courts)

Principle

There must be actionable loss before negligence can produce a damages claim.

24. Case 7 — Larmag Holding B.V. v First Abu Dhabi Bank & Others [2019] DIFC CFI 054

This was a major fraud/deceit dispute involving the transfer of bonds.

The DIFC Court considered the UAE Civil Code's former harmful-act provisions, including the old provisions dealing with:

harmful acts;

causation;

deception;

compensation.

The court explained the traditional UAE harmful-act structure as requiring act, harm and causal relationship. It also considered evidence concerning the fraudulent transfer and resulting loss. (DIFC Courts)

The case is particularly useful because it demonstrates how UAE-law tort principles can operate in a complex commercial fraud dispute.

Principle

A harmful act can include deliberate deceptive conduct, and compensation depends on establishing the resulting harm and causal connection.

25. Case 8 — Globemed Gulf Healthcare Solutions LLC v Oman Insurance Company PSC [2017] DIFC CFI 051

This case concerned a substantial commercial dispute involving damages and UAE law.

The DIFC Court considered UAE authorities concerning actual rather than merely potential damage and noted the importance of proving loss that has occurred or is certain to occur in the future.

The court referred to Dubai Court of Cassation Commercial Cases 46 and 49 of 2006, under which compensation may include damage and consequential lost earnings where legally established, with the claimant carrying the burden of proving lost earnings. (DIFC Courts)

Principle

Speculative loss is different from actual or sufficiently certain future loss.

This is especially important in:

commercial torts;

business interruption;

lost profits;

professional negligence.

26. Direct Harm vs Causal Harm

A useful examination distinction is:

Direct harm

The defendant's conduct itself produces the damage.

Example:
A intentionally destroys B's machine.

Causative harm

The defendant's conduct causes circumstances that lead to damage.

Example:
A creates an unsafe condition and B's property is subsequently damaged.

Article 247 expressly recognises this distinction. (UAE Legislation)

27. External Cause as a Defence

Under Article 249, a defendant may establish that the damage arose from an external cause beyond their control.

Possible external causes include:

force majeure;

sudden accident;

act of God;

third-party conduct;

conduct of the injured person. (UAE Legislation)

Example

A warehouse owner is sued because goods were damaged.

If the owner proves that an extraordinary external event entirely beyond control caused the damage, Article 249 may become relevant.

The precise result depends on the facts and any applicable special legislation or agreement.

28. Contributory Fault

Suppose:

A creates a dangerous situation.

B also acts carelessly.

B's conduct increases the resulting damage.

Article 253 permits the court to consider B's contribution and potentially reduce or deny compensation. (UAE Legislation)

Simple formula

Total harm → Defendant's contribution + Claimant's contribution

The court determines the appropriate allocation according to the circumstances.

29. Moral Damage

Tort liability is not limited to physical property damage.

Article 254 expressly recognises moral harm involving matters such as:

reputation;

honour;

freedom;

social standing;

financial status. (UAE Legislation)

Example

A publishes a false statement seriously damaging B's reputation.

Depending on the applicable legislation and proof, B may have a claim for compensation for the resulting moral harm.

30. Tort Liability of Companies

A legal person can be subject to harmful-act liability under Article 245.

For example:

A company negligently releases a substance that damages neighbouring property.

The legal analysis can involve:

the company's conduct;

the relevant duty;

damage;

causation;

applicable special legislation;

compensation.

Article 245 expressly includes liability arising from harmful acts committed by natural or legal persons. (UAE Legislation)

31. Tort and Criminal Liability

Civil and criminal liability are separate.

A single event can potentially produce both.

Example

A person's unlawful conduct causes physical injury.

There may be:

Criminal question:
Was a criminal offence committed?

Civil question:
What compensation is payable for the injury?

Article 245 expressly states that civil liability does not prejudice criminal liability where its conditions are met. (UAE Legislation)

32. Tort Liability and Compensation

The overall structure can be remembered as:

Wrongful/Harmful Conduct

↓

Damage

↓

Causation

↓

Responsibility

↓

Compensation

Under Article 255, compensation is linked to the extent of the loss and qualifying lost profit that is a natural consequence of the harmful act. (UAE Legislation)

33. Practical Example

Suppose a contractor leaves a dangerous opening in a commercial building.

A visitor falls and suffers injury.

Step 1 — Harmful conduct

The dangerous opening was left unprotected.

Step 2 — Damage

The visitor suffers physical injury and related financial loss.

Step 3 — Causation

Evidence must establish that the dangerous condition caused the accident.

Step 4 — Defences

The contractor may argue:

external cause;

claimant's own conduct;

third-party conduct;

lack of causation.

Step 5 — Compensation

If liability is established, the court assesses the legally recoverable damage.

34. Simple Tort Liability Checklist

Before filing or analysing a tort claim, ask:

What harmful act occurred?

Who performed the act?

Was there an omission?

What damage occurred?

Is the damage legally recognised?

Did the defendant's conduct cause the damage?

Was there an external cause?

Did the claimant contribute to the harm?

Were other persons responsible?

Is the loss actual or sufficiently certain?

Is there moral damage?

What compensation is legally appropriate?

35. Tort Liability — Important Case Table

The DIFC cases above are DIFC authorities, not automatically binding on mainland UAE courts. The Dubai Cassation decisions are mainland Dubai authorities. The distinction is important when using these cases in an examination or legal memorandum.

36. Current-Law Revision Table

The official current legislation confirms the structure of Articles 245–255, including direct/causal harm, external causes, self-defence, multiple responsibility, moral harm and compensation. (UAE Legislation)

37. Short Exam Answer

Tort liability under UAE civil law concerns civil responsibility arising from a harmful act that causes legally recognised damage to another. Under the current Federal Decree-Law No. 25 of 2025, Articles 245–258 establish the principal harmful-act framework. Article 246 provides the basic compensation rule; Article 247 distinguishes direct harm from harm by causation; Article 249 recognises external causes; Article 250 deals with lawful self-defence; Article 253 deals with multiple responsible persons and contribution by the injured party; Article 254 recognises moral harm; and Article 255 governs assessment of compensation based on loss and qualifying lost profit. The basic analytical structure is harmful act, damage, causation, liability and remedy. Important authorities include Dubai Cassation Case No. 33/2019, Dubai Commercial Appeal 445/2020/1034, Shihab Khalil v Shuaa Capital, Haya Spa v Harper/Hasan, Ludiala v Lucaan, Faizal Babu Moorkath v Expresso Telecom, Larmag v FAB, and Globemed v Oman Insurance. Older cases must be read as authorities developed under the former 1985 Civil Code, while the current statutory provisions are those of the 2025 Civil Transactions Law. (UAE Legislation)

38. Quick Revision

Remember:

Tort Liability = Harmful Act + Damage + Causation + Responsibility + Compensation

Most important current provisions:

Art. 245 — scope

Art. 246 — basic liability

Art. 247 — direct/causal harm

Art. 249 — external cause

Art. 250 — self-defence

Art. 253 — multiple tortfeasors/contributory conduct

Art. 254 — moral harm

Art. 255 — compensation

Six cases to remember:

Dubai Cassation 33/2019 — three essential elements.

Dubai Commercial Appeal 445/2020/1034 — causation.

Shihab Khalil v Shuaa Capital — negligence and resulting loss.

Haya Spa v Harper/Hasan — duty, breach, causation and damage.

Ludiala v Lucaan — proof of causation.

Faizal Babu Moorkath v Expresso Telecom — actionable loss.

Core principle:

A person is not normally liable merely because an act occurred; the legal requirements connecting harmful conduct to legally recognised damage must be established.