Cheques are among the most important payment instruments used in commercial and financial transactions in the United Arab Emirates. However, when a cheque is returned because there are no funds or insufficient funds in the account, the cheque holder may have many questions about the steps available to recover the money owed.
Under Federal Decree-Law No. 50 of 2022 Issuing the Commercial Transactions Law, a lack of sufficient funds does not, by itself, automatically constitute a criminal offence as it did under the former legal framework. At the same time, the law provides cheque holders with a more direct method of recovery: a cheque bearing the bank’s confirmation that funds are unavailable or insufficient is an enforceable instrument that may, in principle, be executed compulsorily without first filing a substantive lawsuit to establish the underlying debt.
Nevertheless, certain acts involving cheques remain subject to criminal liability, including closing an account, deliberately withdrawing funds, unlawfully instructing the bank not to honour a cheque, or intentionally signing it in a way that prevents payment.
A bounced cheque generally refers to a cheque presented by its beneficiary to the bank on its due date, only for the bank to find that the account does not contain sufficient funds to pay the cheque in full.
A cheque may be returned for several reasons, including:
From a legal perspective, the reason for dishonour is particularly important because the applicable procedures and legal consequences may differ according to the reason recorded by the bank.
Not in every case.
The UAE legal framework has undergone an important change in its treatment of bounced cheques. The traditional criminalisation of merely having no funds or insufficient funds has
been removed, with greater emphasis placed on recovering the cheque amount through direct enforcement procedures.
Accordingly, a cheque returned solely because of insufficient funds does not automatically result in a criminal case against its drawer.
This does not, however, mean that every act relating to a cheque is now a purely civil matter.
The law continues to criminalise certain acts involving bad faith or deliberate conduct intended to prevent a cheque from being honoured.
Article 675 of the Commercial Transactions Law provides for penalties in certain circumstances, including where the drawer intentionally:
These circumstances differ from a situation in which insufficient funds arise from an ordinary financial difficulty.
The bank’s stated reason for refusing payment and the circumstances surrounding the issuance of the cheque should therefore be examined before selecting the appropriate legal course of action.
In important circumstances, yes.
Article 667 of the Commercial Transactions Law provides that a cheque bearing the bank’s confirmation that funds are unavailable or insufficient constitutes an enforceable instrument.
The holder may seek compulsory enforcement of the cheque, in whole or in part, and the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law govern its enforcement and related disputes.
This is one of the most significant changes to the UAE cheque regime. Where the legal requirements are satisfied, the beneficiary can apply to the execution judge rather than first bringing a lengthy substantive claim to establish entitlement to the debt.
The cheque must first be presented for payment to the bank on which it is drawn.
The law provides that a cheque becomes payable on the date shown on it as its date of issue and may not be presented for payment before that date.
It also provides that a cheque drawn inside or outside the UAE and payable in the UAE must be presented for payment within six months from the date indicated on the cheque.
If the cheque is not paid, it is important to obtain formal confirmation from the bank explaining the reason for non-payment.
Article 663 permits non-payment to be established by a statement issued by the drawee bank, specifying the date on which the cheque was presented.
This document is particularly important because the stated reason for dishonour may determine whether the cheque qualifies for direct enforcement and whether any additional criminal issues arise.
One important point that is sometimes overlooked is that the absence of the full amount does not necessarily mean that nothing can be recovered.
Where the account contains part of the cheque amount, the law requires the bank to make a partial payment of the available balance unless the cheque holder refuses that payment.
When partial payment is made, the bank records the amount paid on the cheque and hands the holder the original cheque together with a certificate of partial payment. The holder retains the right to claim the outstanding balance.
If the cheque was not honoured because funds were unavailable or insufficient, its holder may, subject to the legal requirements, apply to enforce it as an enforceable instrument.
The UAE Ministry of Justice provides an electronic service for registering an execution file. The main steps include logging in, submitting the application, paying the applicable fees, and obtaining the execution file number and notification details. The enforceable instrument and supporting documents must also be submitted.
The online procedures, fees and competent judicial authority may vary depending on the emirate and the court with jurisdiction over the matter.
Once an execution file has been opened, the legally prescribed procedures begin to compel the debtor to satisfy the amount stated in the enforceable instrument.
Depending on the circumstances of the case and the decisions of the execution judge, the process may proceed to compulsory enforcement measures available under the Civil Procedure Law.
This makes it important to identify the debtor’s funds, bank accounts, sources of income and other assets against which enforcement measures may lawfully be taken.
Suppose the cheque amount is:
AED 200,000 While the available account balance is:
AED 60,000 The law permits partial payment of AED 60,000 unless the cheque holder refuses it.
If the partial payment is accepted, the holder retains the right to claim the remaining:
AED 140,000 Using the original cheque endorsed to show the payment and the bank’s certificate, in accordance with the applicable legal procedures.
This may allow the holder to recover part of the money promptly rather than leaving the available balance entirely untouched.
Account closure has particular legal significance.
In January 2024, the Ministry of Justice announced that the Authority for Unification of Federal and Local Judicial Principles had decided that a bank’s notation of “account closed” has the same effect as a lack of funds or insufficient funds for the purpose of treating a cheque as an enforceable instrument under Article 667.
At the same time, the Commercial Transactions Law provides for criminal liability where a person closes an account, withdraws the entire balance or deliberately causes the account to be frozen in the circumstances set out in Article 675.
As a result, certain cases may involve both:
Financial recovery and enforcement proceedings
and
Criminal liability for the same conduct, where the elements of the offence are established.
Not every case of a signature mismatch should be treated in the same way.
A difference in the signature may be an unintentional error; in other cases, it may be deliberate conduct intended to prevent payment of the cheque.
The law criminalises intentionally drawing up or signing a cheque in a manner that prevents its payment.
The facts and evidence must therefore be examined to determine whether the mismatch was an innocent mistake or intentional conduct.
There is an important distinction between the two.
If the cheque meets the conditions for an enforceable instrument, its holder may proceed directly to enforcement to recover the amount.
The advantage is that the holder does not have to begin with a lawsuit to prove that the amount is due, because the law gives the cheque direct enforceability in these circumstances.
A separate substantive claim may be necessary where there is a dispute about the underlying obligation, the reason for issuing the cheque, the terms of the transaction, or where the requirements for direct enforcement are not met.
The appropriate course of action therefore depends on:
Describing a cheque as a “security cheque” is not, by itself, always enough to resolve the dispute.
The courts consider the facts of the transaction, the relevant documents, the obligation secured by the cheque and whether the underlying debt is due.
UAE court judgments have addressed disputes concerning the enforcement of cheques said to have been issued as security. This highlights the need to examine the original agreement under which the cheque was issued rather than relying solely on how the parties described or labelled it.
There is no single fixed timeframe for all cases.
The duration depends on factors such as:
Where the law recognises a cheque as an enforceable instrument, this can eliminate a significant preliminary stage compared with having to bring a full substantive lawsuit before enforcement can begin.
The debtor’s departure from the UAE does not, in itself, extinguish the debt.
In explaining the cheque-related legislative amendments, the Ministry of Justice referred to legal mechanisms for certain cases in which the cheque drawer is outside the country. The procedures vary according to the debtor’s location, the location of the debtor’s assets and the rules governing enforcement of judgments and enforceable instruments.
In these circumstances, it is important to establish:
Yes, and legal action should not be delayed.
Subject to specific exceptions, Article 670 of the Commercial Transactions Law provides that a cheque holder’s recourse claim against the drawer, endorsers and other parties liable for its amount will not be heard after two years have elapsed from the expiry of the period for presenting the cheque.
The same article also prescribes other periods for claims among liable parties and for actions against the drawee bank.
For this reason, a bounced cheque should not be left unattended for an extended period without assessing the appropriate legal procedure.
It is advisable to keep all documents relating to the cheque and the underlying transaction, including:
These documents may be especially important if a dispute arises concerning the underlying debt or the reason the cheque was issued.
It is best to take a structured approach:
If a cheque you have issued is returned unpaid, it is important not to ignore the matter.
You should review:
You should also avoid any action that could be interpreted as a deliberate attempt to prevent payment of the cheque in violation of the law.
A bounced cheque case may appear straightforward, but the appropriate legal route depends on the reason for dishonour, the underlying relationship between the parties and the available documents.
Bin Nakhira & Partners provides legal support to individuals and businesses in commercial and financial disputes. This includes reviewing bounced cheques, assessing enforceability, examining disputes concerning the underlying debt and representing clients before the competent judicial authorities.
Enforcement of judgments · Commercial litigation · Legal services
Legal Note: This article outlines the general rules governing cheques under the UAE Commercial Transactions Law. Practical procedures may differ depending on the reason for dishonour, the emirate, the competent judicial authority and the nature of the original transaction. Each case and its supporting documents should therefore be assessed individually.
Abu Dhabi: 2nd Floor, SJ Tower, 18th Street, Abu Dhabi.
Dubai: Office 1610, 16th Floor, Iris Bay Tower, Business Bay, Al Mustaqbal St.
Mail: [email protected]
Mon – Fri: 8.00am – 18.00pm / Sat & Sunday : Closed
