By: Taha Rashed – Senior Associate
Renad Haseeba – Legal Researcher
Qatar’s issuance of new law No. 4 of 2024 (“Judicial Enforcement Law”) aims to address the recent developments and updates in the judicial system, including the widespread use of advanced technology. These developments necessitated the establishment of special rules and effective provisions concerning the procedures regulating the enforcement of judicial rulings. The Judicial Enforcement Law repeals the narrow enforcement provisions stipulated in the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law (Law No. 13 of 1990), clarifying the enforcement process and granting Enforcement Judges new competencies and authorities.
The Judicial Enforcement Law sets out more comprehensive procedures facilitating the enforcement of judgments issued by courts and preventing judgment debtors from obstructing the fulfilment of a judgment creditor’s rights. It also aims to expedite the resolution of enforcement cases, reducing the administrative burden on the Enforcement Court and preventing the accumulation of unresolved cases.
Under the new law, Enforcement Judges are competent to administer the enforcement procedures of a case, thereby bestowing wide-ranging discretionary authority on them concerning all aspects of enforcement at every stage, making the judge ultimately responsible for issuing decisions and orders related to enforcement, regardless of whether they relate to substantive or injunctive issues, or whether such issues are raised by the parties involved or by third parties. As such, an Enforcement Judge now has the powers previously held by the “Urgent Matter Judges” when ruling on disputes requiring injunctive measures.
Competency to Decide Substantive and Injunctive Issues Relating to Enforcement
According to Judicial Enforcement Law Articles 3 and 34, Enforcement Judges are competent to adjudicate requests related to enforceable instruments, regardless of their type or value. The new law refers to enforcement requests in a general, unspecified manner, thereby broadening Enforcement Judges’ competencies to determine various requests presented before them. For example, under Article 87, Enforcement Judges may rule on objections to the list of sale conditions associated with a public auction, whereas Article 97 addresses an Enforcement Judge’s authority to rule on requests to annul enforcement procedures submitted by a claimant asserting ownership of the property subject to auction.
Furthermore, the Judicial Enforcement Law introduces Article 35, which did not exist in the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law, organising the procedures for an Enforcement Judge to rule on certain requests without holding a court session. However, at its discretion or upon the request of one of the parties, the Enforcement Judge may proceed with a court session to consider requests and decide on them, provided that the parties are notified of the session. This means that the Enforcement Court has the right to schedule sessions to adjudicate requests if it deems that the request necessitates holding a court session.
The competencies of an Enforcement Judge also include the authority to rule on all substantive and injunctive matters previously and still within its authority. Accordingly, the new law no longer refers to the “Urgent Matters Judge” role, as the authorities associated with that role are now within the purview of Enforcement Judges.
Competency to Issue Judgments, Decisions, and Orders Necessary for Enforcement
In addition to the general competencies listed above, the Judicial Enforcement Law grants Enforcement Judges more specific authority as well. Article 5 of the new law grants the Enforcement Judge the right to issue an order for compulsory enforcement if no amicable solution is reached between disputing parties in an enforcement procedure. Similarly, Article 32 empowers judges to decide whether to proceed with enforcement against the heirs of a deceased debtor upon an application from the party that seeks enforcement. An Enforcement Judge also has the power under Article 47 to determine how to enforce custodial judgments in family matters.
Authority to Order Seizure of Assets Belonging to Judgment Debtors
Enforcement Judges also have the authority, after notifying a judgment debtor, to order the seizure of a debtor’s assets in an equivalent value of the enforceable instrument and to initiate property sale procedures to collect the owed amount. This provision is among the newly introduced clauses that did not previously exist in the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law.
Article 49 of the new law permits Enforcement Judges to compel entities and individuals to disclose any assets in their possession owned by the judgment debtor and to hand them over to the court. Additionally, Article 62 allows the Enforcement Judge to issue an order, either on its own or at the request of concerned parties, to seize a debtor’s movable assets, whether in their possession or held by others. Under Article 64, if there is strong evidence of the existence of movables held by others, Enforcement Judges may issue a warrant authorising the search of persons or places to locate those movables. Alternatively, Article 73, which is newly codified, grants Enforcement Judges the authority to issue orders to the relevant registration authorities to seize vehicles and other movables belonging to the judgment debtor, and to prevent their disposal.
According to Article 74, financial markets are responsible for seizing stocks and bonds, and for preventing a judgment debtor from disposing of such assets. Furthermore, Article 77, another new provision without a counterpart in the previous enforcement provisions of the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law, allows Enforcement Judges to inquire about any real estate owned, possessed, or legally utilised by the judgment debtor, either on its own or at the request of concerned parties, and to issue an order to seize and prevent the disposal of such properties.
Authority to Order the Arrest and Detention of Judgment Debtors
The Judicial Enforcement Law grants Enforcement Judges the authority to order the arrest and detention of judgment debtors under Article 34. An Enforcement Judge may also enlist police assistance if necessary to execute the order.
Authority to Issue Orders Prohibiting Non-Compliant Debtors from Participating in Government Contracts
The new law introduces another provision not found in the previous enforcement rules under the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law, granting Enforcement Judges the authority to issue orders to government entities prohibiting them from entering into contracts with judgment debtors who do not comply with the judgments issued against them. This update is another positive enforcement step, protecting government entities from contracting with defaulters and incentivising judgment debtors to comply with judgments.
Authority to Issue Orders Barring Judgment Debtors from Leaving the Country
Articles 39 and 40 of the new law regulate the rules for prohibiting the judgment debtors from leaving the country by granting Enforcement Judges the authority, either on their initiative or at the request of concerned parties, to issue orders prohibiting judgment debtors from travelling if there are legitimate concerns that the judgment debtor might flee abroad and transfer their assets outside of Qatar.
This authority extends to legal entities whereby Enforcement Judges may impose travel bans on an entity’s representative if there is a risk that the representative might flee abroad and transfer the assets or possessions of the legal entity outside of Qatar.
Authority to Imprison Judgment Debtors
Under Article 42 of the Judicial Enforcement Law, Enforcement Judges, either on their own or at the request of concerned parties, have the authority to imprison judgment debtors for a period not exceeding three months in a given year if it is determined that the debtor is capable of making payment but has refused to do so. If the judgment debtor is a legal entity, the judge may order the imprisonment of the representative of that entity for impeding the enforcement process.
Additionally, under the second paragraph of Article 37, Enforcement Judges have the authority to cancel or modify the procedures they have initiated if the debtor offers a guarantee or can prove extenuating circumstances affecting compliance with enforcement of the judgment.
Authority to Set and Accept Bail
The new law also grants Enforcement Judges the authority to set bail amounts based on the case presented before the court. According to the second paragraph of Article 7, which deals with expedited enforcement in commercial matters, the Enforcement Judge determines the value of the bail that must be provided.
Further, Article 43 grants Enforcement Judges the discretion to accept or reject the bail offered by the judgment debtor, whether in the form of a bank guarantee or a solvent guarantor. Under Article 12, Enforcement Judges have the discretion to permit alternatives to bail in cases where enforcement of the judgment is contingent upon the provision of bail. Such alternatives may include provision of a bank guarantee equivalent to the amount of the bail, depositing what is collected from the enforcement into the court’s treasury, handing over the property that is the subject of the judgment or surrendering it to a custodian, or depositing it in a secure location determined by the judge.
Authority to Grant the Judgment Debtor Time to File an Objection
Article 33 permits an Enforcement Judge the authority to grant the judgment debtor a period not exceeding ninety working days to file an objection against the enforcement process. During this period, the Enforcement Judge has discretion to suspend the enforcement proceedings against the judgment debtor.
Authority to Appoint Appraisers and to Determine Auction Conditions
According to Article 67 of the new law, Enforcement Judges can appoint an appraiser in lawsuits involving jewellery, gold and silver bullion, precious stones, and other materials. Enforcement Judges may also appoint guardians of the seized property if necessary.
Similarly, Article 76 grants Enforcement Judges the authority to appoint a specialist to sell stocks and bonds, while Article 80 gives them the authority to order a lessee to deposit rental payments from property into the court’s treasury.
In Articles 84 and 88, the new law makes Enforcement Judges responsible for setting dates for auctioning a judgment debtor’s assets and the conditions of sale. Enforcement Judges also have the authority to determine the method of advertising the auction, either through newspapers or electronically. Including electronic means in this context is timely as Qatar increasingly adopts digital methodologies in the judicial process.
In conclusion, the new Enforcement Law represents a significant shift in the country’s enforcement procedures by granting Enforcement Judges broad discretion regarding enforcement proceedings. These new legal provisions are expected to expedite enforcement procedures and reduce the backlog of enforcement cases.
