A recent judgment of the ADGM Court of First Instance has provided important guidance on the relationship between mainland Abu Dhabi real estate law and ADGM’s own real property regime. The case is significant because it appears to be one of the first decisions to examine the distinction between public policy under the mainland legal framework and public policy within ADGM, particularly in the context of real estate transactions.

The dispute concerned a sale and purchase agreement for land located on Al Reem Island. The timing of the transaction was central. Al Reem Island had already been brought within the geographical jurisdiction of ADGM, but the full application of ADGM real property laws to Al Reem Island was deferred until 1 January 2025. This placed the transaction at the intersection of two legal systems: the Abu Dhabi mainland registration regime and the ADGM real property framework.

The key issue was whether the transaction should be assessed by reference to mainland Abu Dhabi real estate laws or ADGM law as the law applicable to land situated within ADGM. In particular, the Court considered the meaning of Article 22(12) of Abu Dhabi Law No. 4 of 2013, which provides that transactions relating to land within ADGM shall be governed by the “real estate laws of the Emirate”.

The Court’s reasoning is important. It recognised that the phrase “real estate laws of the Emirate” does not necessarily mean only the mainland real estate laws of Abu Dhabi. ADGM forms part of the Emirate, but it has its own legislative and judicial framework. Accordingly, where land is located within ADGM, ADGM real property law may itself form part of the real estate laws of the Emirate.

This distinction has wider importance for public policy. Mainland Abu Dhabi public policy in real estate matters is closely connected to formal registration requirements, certainty of ownership, and the role of the competent public authority in recording and controlling property transfers. ADGM public policy, while sharing the same sovereign foundation, operates through a different legal architecture. It places particular emphasis on the integrity of the ADGM register, commercial certainty, enforceability of bargains, and the availability of equitable remedies such as specific performance.

The judgment also confirms the importance of conflict of laws principles. ADGM law applies to matters of remedy, evidence and procedure as the law of the forum. Further, where the land is situated within ADGM and transfer must be effected through the ADGM registration system, ADGM law plays a decisive role in determining the remedies available to the parties.

For developers, investors and practitioners, the decision provides a practical reminder that real estate transactions involving ADGM land must be analysed carefully. Parties should not assume that references to Abu Dhabi law automatically import the mainland registration regime to the exclusion of ADGM law. Public policy arguments in ADGM must be framed by reference to ADGM’s own statutory framework and institutional purpose.

The broader lesson is that public policy must be understood jurisdictionally. Mainland Abu Dhabi and ADGM exist within the same Emirate, but they operate through different legal systems. Their public policy objectives may overlap, but they are not always applied through the same legal rules.

This judgment is therefore an important contribution to the developing jurisprudence of ADGM real estate law. It provides a useful framework for understanding how the ADGM Courts may approach disputes where mainland Abu Dhabi real estate concepts and ADGM legal principles intersect.

Article authored by Mr. Ahmed Soliman, Senior Associate at QAF Legal.