Qatar

Dentons has advised Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego (BGK), the Polish development bank, on a long-term investment loan of up to US$60 million granted to the Molo Group, owned by the Slominski family. The financing will be used to build a hotel complex with 251 rooms and suites on Providenciales, the main island of the Turks and Caicos archipelago in the Caribbean. The buildings will be constructed from equipment and modules manufactured in Poland. “It has been a great pleasure and satisfaction to assist BGK with this prestigious financing transaction, supporting the expansion of Molo Group in their largest investment to date. This project not only promotes Polish exports but also features exceptional hotel developments in some of the most stunning locations in the Caribbean”, said Tomasz Zwoliński, partner in the Banking and Finance practice in Warsaw. The complex includes two modular hotels: the 4-star boutique Indigo hotel and the 5-star Kimpton hotel. Both brands are owned by the international IHG group. The Indigo hotel is scheduled for completion by the end of 2025, while the Kimpton is scheduled for completion in the first half of 2027. Tomasz Zwoliński supervised and led the cross-border project, advising on English and Polish law matters related to preparing, negotiating and signing the finance documents and securities, which covered five jurisdictions and involved collateral and mechanisms related to hurricane risk. He was supported by Jakub Zienkiewicz (counsel) and Kamil Bator (associate) from the Banking and Finance team in Warsaw. The transaction team also included partner Babette Märzheuser-Wood, Global Head of the Franchise Group, and Agnieszka Nagórska-Kordeczka (counsel), who advised on hotel franchise agreements. Dentons worked alongside teams from Griffiths & Partners, who served as Turks and Caicos counsel, and Massiah Law, acting as Gibraltar law counsel, both members of the Nextlaw referral network. About Dentons Across over 80 countries, Dentons helps you grow, protect, operate and finance your organization by providing uniquely global and deeply local legal solutions. Polycentric, purpose-driven and committed to inclusion, diversity, equity and sustainability, we focus on what matters most to you. dentons.com Media contact Lidia Adamczyk Communications, Marketing & Business Development Manager +48 513 045 352 [email protected]  

By Aletefaq Law Firm and Legal ConsultantsThe protection afforded by commercial arbitration is not complete when an award is issued in a party’s favour. Its practical value ultimately depends on whether it can be enforced and the rights it establishes can be realised. Enforcement therefore forms an essential part of dispute management, requiring preparation from the drafting of the arbitration agreement, through the conduct of the proceedings, to the application for recognition and enforcement before the competent court.This consideration is particularly significant in cross-border transactions, where an award may be rendered in one jurisdiction while the award debtor’s assets or business operations are located in another. Moving from an award to recovery requires a precise understanding of the relationship between international conventions and domestic legislation, as well as the statutory limits on judicial scrutiny of arbitral awards.In Qatar, the legal framework for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards comprises the 1958 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, commonly known as the New York Convention, the Arbitration Law in Civil and Commercial Matters promulgated by Law No. 2 of 2017, and the Judicial Enforcement Law promulgated by Law No. 4 of 2024. Article 34 of the Arbitration Law provides that arbitral awards have res judicata effect and are enforceable in accordance with the Law, irrespective of the country in which they were rendered. These provisions must be read with due regard to the international conventions in force in Qatar and their applicability to the particular award.Preparing an enforcement application begins with assembling the required supporting documents. Under Article 34(2) of the Arbitration Law, the application must be submitted in writing to the competent judge, accompanied by a copy of the arbitration agreement, the original award or a signed copy in the language in which it was rendered, and an Arabic translation prepared by an accredited entity where the award is in a foreign language. This is subject to the provision concerning an alternative method of enforcement agreed by the parties. In practice, preparation requires careful attention to the consistency of the parties’ names and capacities, the accuracy of the translation, and the precise identification of the obligations and amounts set out in the operative part of the award.The Judicial Enforcement Law reinforces the distinct framework applicable to arbitral awards. Article 18 limits the refusal of enforcement, irrespective of the country in which the award was rendered, to the grounds specified in Article 35 of the Arbitration Law. It follows from this limitation that a party’s dissatisfaction with the outcome, or its wish to revisit the evidence, does not in itself constitute an independent ground for refusing enforcement. An objection must fall within a recognised statutory ground and satisfy the applicable evidential requirements.Subject to the statutory requirements, the grounds that may be invoked by the party resisting enforcement concern capacity and the validity of the arbitration agreement; proper notice and the opportunity to present its case; whether the award falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement; the composition of the tribunal and the arbitral procedure; and the award’s binding status, or its having been set aside or suspended by a competent court in the country in which, or under the law of which, it was rendered. The judge may also examine, on the judge’s own initiative, whether the subject matter is capable of settlement by arbitration and whether recognition or enforcement would conflict with public policy. Addressing these issues requires a clear understanding of the nature and limits of each objection, while maintaining the distinction between grounds for refusing enforcement and a reconsideration of the merits.The proper conduct and documentation of the arbitration are therefore significant to subsequent enforcement. Maintaining a clear record of notices, the constitution of the tribunal, the exchange of submissions and documents, and the opportunities afforded to the parties to present their cases helps place procedural objections in their proper context. The quality of the enforcement application consequently depends, in part, on the quality of the proceedings that preceded it.Procedural time limits require separate consideration. Article 17 of the Judicial Enforcement Law makes the admissibility of an application to enforce an arbitral award conditional upon the expiry of the period for bringing an action to set it aside, in accordance with the procedures prescribed by the Arbitration Law. When applying these provisions to a foreign award, it is necessary to examine the seat of arbitration, the scope of the applicable procedural law, the relevant international convention, the status of the award, and any proceedings concerning it. A single time limit or procedural route should not be assumed to apply to every foreign award.Similarly, knowledge that an application to set aside the award has been filed in the country where it was rendered does not dispense with the need to assess its effect on enforcement proceedings in Qatar. Article 35 permits the competent judge to adjourn enforcement as considered appropriate where such proceedings are pending. It also permits the judge, at the request of the party seeking recognition or enforcement, to order the other party to provide appropriate security. This makes it important to distinguish between a pending challenge, an order suspending enforcement, and a decision setting aside the award, and to assess the consequences of each under the applicable provisions.An effective enforcement strategy also requires consideration of whether assets and the income they generate need protection against risks that could undermine recovery. Qatar’s legal framework provides for conservatory measures whose suitability depends on the nature of the assets and the circumstances of the dispute, subject to statutory requirements and judicial oversight. Professional preparation is particularly valuable in selecting a proportionate measure, defining its scope, and supporting the application with facts and documents that justify the relief sought.Effective enforcement of foreign arbitral awards requires an integrated understanding of the award’s binding effect, the limits of judicial scrutiny, the relevant procedural requirements, and the practical prospects of recovery. Preparing a complete enforcement file at an early stage helps prevent deficiencies that may impede the application and allows objections and risks to be addressed systematically. The ultimate objective is to enable the successful party to obtain the practical benefit of the award rendered in its favour.