From 1 December 2026, businesses in the UAE that play music commercially will be required to obtain an annual music licence under Ministerial Resolution No. 136 of 2026 and the Ministry of Economy and Tourism’s new Collective Management in Music Guide.
The initiative represents an important development in the UAE’s copyright framework. Copyright grants creators and other rights holders exclusive rights over certain uses of their musical works and sound recordings, including their performance or communication to the public.
Playing protected music in a commercial setting may therefore require separate permission from the relevant copyright holders. The new framework covers restaurants, cafés, hotels and floating hotels, shopping centres, gyms, airlines, radio and television broadcasters, concerts, and similar events. Licensing fees will vary according to the type and size of the business and how the music is used, with live performances generally attracting higher fees than recorded or background music.
Fees will be collected by two Ministry-licensed collective management organisations: Music Nation and the Emirates Music Rights Association. Collective management allows music rights to be licensed centrally and royalties to be distributed to eligible composers, performers, producers, publishers, and other rights holders. Licences will be valid for one year and may be renewed.
Ten per cent of the fees collected will be allocated to a Cultural Support Fund for Musicians, supporting artists across different stages of music creation and production.
Exemptions apply to government entities, educational and academic institutions, national occasions, and private, non-commercial celebrations.
Importantly, the charge is a copyright licensing fee rather than a tax. A personal streaming subscription does not generally include the public-performance rights required to play music commercially.
The detailed fee schedule and coordination arrangements between the two collecting entities have not yet been published. Businesses should review how they use music and monitor further official guidance ahead of implementation.
On July 13, 2026 the UAE Cabinet has issued Cabinet Resolution No. (107) of 2026, approving the Executive Regulations of Federal Decree-Law No. (42) of 2023 on Combatting Commercial Fraud. The Regulations establish a comprehensive framework for the detection, investigation, recall, seizure, disposal, and settlement of commercial fraud violations, while enhancing coordination between federal and local authorities to strengthen consumer protection and market integrity.
The Resolution repeals the previous Executive Regulations issued under Cabinet Resolution No. (11) of 2020 and introduces more detailed procedures reflecting current enforcement priorities.
Key Highlights
1. Enhanced Coordination Between Authorities
The Regulations clarify the respective roles of the Ministry of Economy and Tourism and the competent local authorities. While local authorities remain primarily responsible for recalls and enforcement within their jurisdictions, the Ministry may intervene where:
the competent authority fails to act within prescribed timeframes;
the authority declines to exercise its powers;
fraudulent goods are distributed across multiple Emirates; or
the case involves significant risks to public health, animal health, or the environment.
This framework ensures a coordinated national response to large-scale or high-risk commercial fraud cases.
2. Comprehensive Inspection and Investigation Powers
Judicial Enforcement Officers are granted extensive powers to investigate suspected commercial fraud, including the authority to:
inspect commercial premises, warehouses, factories, and other non-residential locations;
inspect electronic systems and digital records where necessary;
collect product samples for laboratory examination;
seize and impound suspected goods pending investigation; and
refer samples to accredited laboratories inside or outside the UAE.
Strict timelines are introduced for inspections, laboratory testing, and notification of results to ensure procedural efficiency.
3. Mandatory Product Recall Procedures
Where fraudulent, spoiled, or counterfeit goods are identified, suppliers are required to:
immediately cease the sale or display of the affected products;
initiate a recall within 24 hours;
notify distributors and retailers;
retrieve products from the market; and
provide evidence demonstrating compliance with the recall process.
Failure to conduct the recall empowers the Ministry or competent authority to carry out the recall directly at the supplier’s expense, without prejudice to administrative penalties.
4. Public Notification Requirements
The Regulations impose detailed obligations regarding public announcements of recalled products.
Recall notices must generally:
be published in Arabic and English;
identify the product, trademark, model, and country of origin;
provide refund procedures;
identify collection locations;
include supplier contact details; and
be published through approved media channels within prescribed deadlines.
The authorities may require additional announcements depending on the seriousness of the risk or the geographical spread of the affected goods.
5. Disposal, Recycling and Utilisation of Goods
The Regulations establish detailed procedures governing the treatment of fraudulent goods after seizure.
Depending on the circumstances, goods may be:
destroyed;
recycled;
utilised for approved purposes; or
re-exported to their country of origin.
Any utilisation or recycling requires approval by the Higher Committee or the competent court and must ensure:
removal of counterfeit intellectual property;
protection of public health and the environment; and
prevention of any further circulation of fraudulent goods.
6. Re-export of Goods
Where destruction has not yet been ordered, suppliers may be required to re-export recalled goods to their country of origin within 30 days at their own expense.
Where suppliers fail to do so, the authorities may undertake re-export or destruction while recovering all associated costs from the supplier.
7. Detailed Destruction Procedures
The Regulations prescribe comprehensive controls governing destruction of fraudulent goods, including:
obtaining a court order or decision of the Higher Committee;
ensuring goods are permanently rendered unusable;
preventing environmental harm during destruction;
maintaining official destruction records; and
recovering destruction costs from the supplier.
Where necessary, destruction may also be carried out outside the UAE.
8. Administrative Enforcement
The Resolution reinforces administrative enforcement by introducing penalties for persons who knowingly deal with fraudulent or harmful goods, including cases involving:
medicines;
agricultural products;
organic food products;
unsafe consumer goods;
misleading advertising; and
fraudulent marketing practices.
9. Settlement Mechanism
A structured administrative settlement process is introduced, allowing violators to request settlement before litigation, subject to several conditions, including:
submission within prescribed deadlines;
absence of intentional misconduct;
rectification of the violation;
payment of the agreed settlement amount; and
no previous penalties under the Decree-Law during the preceding twelve months.
The Regulations also establish procedures for appeals where settlement applications are rejected.
Practical Impact on Businesses
Businesses operating in the UAE should review their internal compliance programmes to ensure they are capable of:
identifying potentially fraudulent or defective products;
implementing rapid recall procedures;
maintaining accurate product traceability records;
responding promptly to inspection requests;
coordinating effectively with regulators; and
managing product disposal in accordance with the new regulatory requirements.
Manufacturers, importers, distributors, retailers and logistics providers should also revisit their contractual arrangements to allocate responsibility for recalls, testing costs, destruction expenses and regulatory compliance.
Concluding remarks
Cabinet Resolution No. (107) of 2026 significantly strengthens the UAE’s commercial fraud enforcement regime by introducing detailed operational procedures for inspections, recalls, investigations, disposal of fraudulent goods and administrative settlements.
The Regulations reinforce the UAE’s commitment to consumer protection, fair competition and market integrity, while providing authorities with expanded enforcement powers and establishing clearer compliance obligations for businesses throughout the supply chain.
The Resolution will enter into force 30 days after its publication in the Official Gazette, which means on August 12, 2026.
For more information or inquiries, please contact our experienced team at dubai@unitedtm.com.
The United Arab Emirates has officially acceded to the Locarno Agreement Establishing an International Classification for Industrial Designs, with the Agreement set to enter into force on 6 October 2026.
By adopting the internationally recognized Locarno Classification, the UAE will use a standardized system for classifying industrial designs that is already applied by many jurisdictions worldwide. This brings several benefits, including:
Greater consistency in the examination and administration of design applications.
Easier identification and comparison of registered designs across participating jurisdictions.
Improved efficiency for applicants, IP professionals, and intellectual property offices through the use of a common classification framework.
Enhanced harmonization with international design protection practices, making it easier for businesses seeking protection in multiple markets.
The UAE’s accession to the Locarno Agreement reflects its strong collaboration with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), under the leadership of Daren Tang, Director General of WIPO, in advancing international IP cooperation and harmonized protection standards. Under the leadership of H.E. Abdulla bin Touq Al Marri, Minister of Economy and Tourism and H.E. Dr. Abdulrahman Hassan Al Muaini, Assistant Undersecretary for Intellectual Property Rights Sector at the Ministry of Economy and Tourism, the UAE has continued to introduce forward-looking IP initiatives that strengthen confidence among innovators, designers, and investors while reinforcing the country’s position as a global hub for innovation and the creative economy.
As the UAE continues to strengthen its industrial design protection framework, UTMPS is well positioned to assist businesses, designers, and rights holders with securing and managing design protection in the UAE, helping them navigate local requirements while aligning their IP strategies with international best practices.
Protecting trademarks across borders is about to become significantly easier for businesses operating in or expanding into Saudi Arabia.
Following its accession to the Madrid Protocol on 8 July 2026, the Kingdom will officially become part of the Madrid System on 8 October 2026. As the largest economy in the Middle East and a G20 nation, Saudi Arabia’s accession is one of the most significant developments in international trademark protection in recent years. It also means that five of the six GCC countries are now members of the Madrid System, further strengthening regional trademark protection.
The Madrid System enables businesses to secure trademark protection across multiple jurisdictions through a single international application, eliminating the need for separate national filings in each country. For trademark owners worldwide, Saudi Arabia can now be designated within an international registration, while Saudi businesses gain access to protection in over 130 countries through one streamlined filing.
The benefits extend well beyond convenience. International applicants can reduce administrative burdens, avoid many upfront legalization requirements, and simplify the management of global trademark portfolios. At the same time, Saudi companies, particularly startups and SMEs, can expand internationally with greater efficiency and lower costs.
This milestone also reflects Saudi Arabia’s continued commitment to strengthening its intellectual property framework under Vision 2030, creating a more attractive environment for innovation, investment, and international trade.
While the Madrid System simplifies the filing process, local examination standards, opposition procedures, and Saudi-specific legal requirements remain important considerations. A well-planned filing strategy is therefore essential to maximize protection and avoid unnecessary delays.
With an established office in Riyadh and a dedicated team of trademark professionals across the GCC and wider Middle East, our firm is uniquely positioned to guide businesses through every stage of the Madrid Protocol process. Whether you are seeking trademark protection in Saudi Arabia or expanding your brand internationally, we provide strategic advice, seamless filings, portfolio management, and enforcement support to help safeguard your intellectual property.
Recent enforcement activity in Oman demonstrates an increasingly visible and coordinated approach to protecting consumers and addressing the circulation of counterfeit, prohibited, unsafe and otherwise non-compliant products.
Between 1 June and 15 July 2026, the Omani authorities announced a series of inspections, seizures, recalls and public warnings covering a broad range of consumer products. The actions were undertaken by several competent authorities and targeted violations both within the local market and across illicit supply channels.
Counterfeit personal-care products seized
One of the most notable actions involved the seizure of more than 400 counterfeit toothpaste and shampoo products.
The availability of counterfeit personal-care products presents risks extending beyond trade mark infringement. Products of this nature are applied directly to the body and may contain unregulated or undisclosed ingredients, creating potential health and safety concerns for consumers.
The action therefore illustrates the close connection between intellectual property enforcement, consumer protection and public health.
More than 13 tons of fake shisha tobacco materials uncovered
In Barka, the authorities seized more than 13 tons of materials reportedly used in the production of counterfeit shisha tobacco.
The scale of the seizure is particularly significant. It suggests that the activity may have extended beyond the retail sale of isolated counterfeit products and involved the possession of materials capable of supporting larger-scale production or distribution.
Operations of this nature can disrupt counterfeit supply chains before the finished goods reach consumers and provide authorities with an opportunity to identify the parties involved in their manufacture, storage and circulation.
Hundreds of prohibited and illegal goods removed from the market
Market inspections conducted in Sinaw resulted in the seizure of 163 prohibited products.
Separately, inspections in Al Dakhliyah led to the seizure of 835 illegal products. The goods reportedly included items that failed to comply with applicable consumer-protection and market requirements.
These actions reflect the importance of regular market surveillance, particularly in identifying products that may enter commercial circulation through informal or unauthorized distribution channels.
Action against illicit tobacco, cigarettes and alcohol
A raid in Shinas resulted in the seizure of illegal tobacco products, cigarettes and alcoholic beverages.
Although not every illicit product necessarily involves intellectual property infringement, illegal trade frequently overlaps with counterfeiting, unauthorized distribution, tax evasion, smuggling and the sale of goods whose origin or composition cannot be reliably established.
Coordinated enforcement against illicit trade can therefore contribute to broader brand-protection objectives while also protecting legitimate businesses and authorized supply chains.
Consumer Protection Authority issues warning over non-compliant insecticide products
The Consumer Protection Authority (CPA) has issued a public advisory warning consumers against purchasing, circulating, or using the insecticide products “Goodbye all insect spray” and “Goodbye all insect max kills in one spray”, manufactured by SCITRA. According to the Authority, the products do not meet the approved regulatory requirements and standards, and the manufacturer does not have a local agent in the Sultanate. Consumers are advised to purchase insecticides only from authorized retailers and to report any suspicious or non-compliant products through the CPA’s official communication channels.
Expired animal feed and unsafe tyres seized
The authorities seized approximately 3,000 kilograms of expired animal feed in Barka.
In a separate action in Al Dakhliyah, more than 500 unsafe tyres, reportedly valued at approximately OMR 1,300, were removed from the market.
These cases demonstrate that enforcement is not limited to conventional counterfeit luxury goods or consumer merchandise. Non-compliant automotive products, agricultural goods and other safety-sensitive products can create substantial risks to consumers, businesses and the wider public.
Food Safety Authority recalls Godiva chocolate bar over undeclared allergen
Oman’s Food Safety and Quality Centre ordered the recall of the GODIVA Kunafah & Pistachio Milk Chocolate Bar after the manufacturer notified the authorities that the product contained eggs that were not declared on the nutritional label. The undeclared allergen posed a potential health risk to consumers with egg allergies, prompting the withdrawal of the affected product from the Omani market and measures to prevent its entry through ports and border crossings.
A broader enforcement picture
Taken together, these actions point to sustained enforcement activity by the Omani authorities across several sectors, including:
personal-care products;
tobacco and related materials;
medicines and insecticides;
automotive products;
food products;
animal feed; and
prohibited and illicit consumer goods.
The developments also demonstrate that the fight against illicit trade cannot be viewed solely as an intellectual property issue. Counterfeit and unauthorized goods frequently raise simultaneous concerns relating to consumer safety, public health, product registration, customs compliance and unfair competition.
For brand owners operating in Oman, the recent enforcement activity highlights the importance of maintaining accurate intelligence concerning local distribution channels, identifying suspicious traders and providing the authorities with clear product-authentication materials whenever enforcement support is required.
It also reinforces the value of cooperation between rights holders and the competent authorities. Effective enforcement depends not only on the applicable legal procedures but also on the availability of practical information that allows inspectors and enforcement officers to distinguish genuine products from counterfeit, unauthorized or unsafe alternatives.
While recent reports by certain IP firms have referred to the possible introduction of a formal intellectual property customs recordal system in Oman, no official public announcement confirming the system has yet been identified. Rights holders should therefore continue to monitor developments and await clarification from the competent Omani authorities.
Regardless of whether a formal customs recordal mechanism is officially confirmed, the enforcement actions announced since the beginning of June demonstrate that Oman is actively addressing illicit and unsafe trade and strengthening the protection of its marketplace and consumers.
To learn more about our Brand Protection & Anti-Counterfeiting services, visit our dedicated page here.
For further information on Oman’s intellectual property landscape, click here.
The Saudi Authority for Intellectual Property (SAIP) has introduced TAHAQAQ (تحقق), a new electronic platform designed to strengthen trademark enforcement at the Kingdom’s borders. The initiative establishes a formal digital customs recordal system, enabling trademark owners and their authorised representatives to register their rights with Customs and receive automated notifications when potentially infringing shipments are identified.
The platform streamlines the verification process by allowing rights holders to review case materials electronically, including photographs and shipment details, before determining the appropriate course of action. During the pilot phase, importers may retain goods under a formal undertaking pending verification, while Customs preserves evidence and continues to oversee enforcement where necessary.
TAHAQAQ represents a significant advancement in Saudi Arabia’s intellectual property framework, shifting trademark protection from a largely reactive model to one centred on proactive, technology-driven enforcement. The initiative is expected to improve cooperation between Customs, SAIP, and brand owners while supporting more efficient anti-counterfeiting efforts.
Find out more about protecting IP in Saudi by visiting this link
The UAE has taken another important step in strengthening its industrial property and patent protection framework through the formation of the Industrial Property Grievance Committee. While some market commentary has described it as an “appellate board,” the official name used in Cabinet Resolution No. 36 of 2025 is the Industrial Property Grievance Committee, and that distinction matters because this is not simply a new label on an old process. It gives applicants, patent owners, and interested third parties a clearer administrative route for challenging Ministry decisions before moving into court proceedings where applicable. For innovators, this is the kind of procedural upgrade that can turn uncertainty into a manageable legal pathway, especially in sectors where one patent decision can shape investment, licensing, fundraising, product launches, and market entry. The official UAE legislation platform lists Cabinet Resolution No. 36 of 2025 as issued on March 27, 2025, published in Official Gazette No. 796 on March 28, 2025, and marked as active.
This development also fits into a much bigger UAE policy story: the country wants to be taken seriously as a regional and global innovation hub, not just as a place where businesses register entities or open regional headquarters. The Ministry of Economy and Tourism has highlighted that the UAE’s industrial property framework is built around Federal Law No. 11 of 2021, which applies to patents, industrial designs, integrated circuits, undisclosed information, and utility models, including within free zones. That wider scope is important because many IP disputes do not sit neatly in one box. A technology company may have a patent issue, a design issue, a trade secret issue, and a licensing issue all sitting inside the same commercial relationship. In that kind of environment, a structured grievance mechanism is less like paperwork and more like a pressure valve: it gives parties a formal place to present arguments before the dispute escalates.
Official Legal Basis and Timeline
The legal foundation for the new mechanism is Cabinet Resolution No. 36 of 2025 Regarding the Formation and Rules of Procedure of the Industrial Property Grievance Committee. The Resolution states that the Committee was established to adjudicate grievances referred to under Federal Law No. 11 of 2021, with the Ministry of Economy serving as the relevant Ministry for the purposes of the Resolution. It also names the Committee chair and members, sets the Committee’s jurisdiction, and explains how grievances are to be submitted, registered, heard, and decided. In simple terms, it takes the grievance concept that already existed in the wider industrial property law and gives it a practical operating structure. The Resolution also provides that it is to be published in the Official Gazette and enter into force on the day following publication, which is why applicants should treat the official publication timeline as the most reliable reference point.
Federal Law No. 11 of 2021 is equally important because it explains why the Committee exists in the first place. The Law defines the Committee as the grievance committee formed by Cabinet decision, defines the competent court as the Abu Dhabi Federal Court of Appeal, and defines industrial property as rights attached to patents, utility model certificates, designs, integrated circuits, and undisclosed information. It also states that industrial property protection aims to support knowledge and innovation in the UAE while enhancing the country’s competitiveness in line with international best practices. So, when we talk about the new Committee, we are not talking about a small procedural footnote. We are talking about a formal bridge between technical examination decisions, administrative review, and the broader protection of innovation in the UAE.
What Changed for Applicants and Interested Parties
Before this structure was clarified, applicants and interested parties often had to navigate a process that could feel fragmented, especially where a Ministry decision affected the fate of a patent, utility model, or industrial design. The law already contemplated grievances and objections, but Cabinet Resolution No. 36 of 2025 now provides a more detailed procedural map. For a patent applicant, that means deadlines become easier to track, evidence requirements become harder to ignore, and the review process becomes more predictable. For third parties, such as competitors or commercial partners, the Committee may also be relevant where they are directly affected by a Ministry decision issued under the industrial property framework. That extra clarity matters because intellectual property rights are time-sensitive assets; delay can weaken negotiating power, disrupt investment plans, and make enforcement strategy harder to execute.
Area
Earlier Position
Position Under the New Committee Framework
Review route
Grievance rights existed under the law, but procedural detail was less visible to applicants
Cabinet Resolution No. 36 of 2025 sets out formation, procedures, meetings, evidence handling, and decision timelines
Filing period
Applicants had to rely on the underlying law and executive regulations
A grievance must be submitted within 60 working days from notification of the decision
Evidence
Supporting documents were expected, but the process was less clearly structured
The grievance must use the prescribed form and include supporting documents and evidentiary materials
Hearings
Less practical detail publicly available
Parties may be notified of hearings, appear personally or through representatives, and the Committee may proceed in absence
Decision timeline
Less visibility over administrative timing
The Committee must issue a final decision within 60 days from grievance submission
Notification
Less clarity for parties tracking next steps
Final decisions must be served within 15 working days by modern communication means
The biggest practical change is that the Committee creates a recognisable administrative review layer. Article 74 of Federal Law No. 11 of 2021 states that the Committee is competent to decide grievances filed by concerned parties against decisions issued under the Law and Executive Regulations, and it also provides that, subject to the patent re-examination rule, no court action will be accepted unless a grievance has first been filed before the Committee. This makes the Committee more than a courtesy step. It is a gatekeeping stage in the dispute journey, and applicants should treat it with the same seriousness they would give to a court filing. A weak grievance can narrow the story before it reaches the next stage, while a carefully prepared grievance can frame the technical and legal issues in a way that protects the applicant’s position.
Filing a Grievance: Timeline and Requirements
Under Cabinet Resolution No. 36 of 2025, a grievance must be submitted to the Committee within sixty working days from the date the concerned party is notified of the decision. This is one of the most applicant-relevant details in the whole Resolution because patent and industrial property timelines do not forgive casual diary management. If a party misses the filing window, it may lose a valuable opportunity to challenge the decision through the administrative route. The Resolution also states that the grievance must be submitted using the application form prescribed by the Committee and must be accompanied by supporting documents and evidentiary materials. It further allows the Committee to ask either the Ministry or the grievant for additional information, clarifications, documents, or materials connected to the dispute.
In practice, this means a grievance should not be treated as a short objection letter written at the last minute. It should be prepared more like a compact case file: decision under challenge, legal basis, technical explanation, supporting evidence, procedural history, and the remedy being requested. For patent applicants, this may involve claim charts, examiner correspondence, prior art analysis, technical declarations, assignment records, priority documents, translation notes, or expert input depending on the issue. For interested third parties, it may involve showing why they are affected and why the Ministry decision should be reviewed under the industrial property framework. Think of the grievance as the moment where the record starts to harden. If the strongest documents are not submitted early, the party may spend the rest of the dispute trying to repair a file that should have been built correctly from day one.
How the Committee Handles a Case
Once a grievance is received, the Secretary of the Committee must register it, assign it a sequential number, record the date of submission and relevant details in a special register, and issue a receipt confirming that the grievance has been received and registered. This may sound administrative, but it is extremely useful in real disputes because parties often need a clean paper trail showing when the grievance was filed and what was submitted. The Committee can then request further data or documents and set an appropriate deadline for submission. Parties are also notified of the scheduled hearing date, and the Committee may allow them to appear either on its own initiative or at the request of the parties. If a grievant or opposing party fails to appear personally or through a representative, the Committee may still decide the grievance in their absence.
The Resolution also gives the Committee flexibility in how it reviews disputes. It may allow parties to submit new documents or evidence that could materially affect the subject of the grievance, and it may seek assistance from experts or specialists when it considers that appropriate. Those experts do not have voting rights during deliberations, which helps preserve the Committee’s decision-making authority while still allowing it to benefit from technical knowledge. That balance is especially important in patent matters, where the deciding body may need to understand engineering, chemistry, software, life sciences, manufacturing processes, or design functionality before reaching a reasoned view. The Committee may also hold hearings remotely and allow members to attend by modern communication means with the Chairman’s approval, which is a practical feature for a jurisdiction that regularly deals with foreign applicants, international counsel, and cross-border portfolios.
Committee Formation, Impartiality, and Governance
The Committee is chaired by Judge Dr. Abdulrahim Mohammed Al Amoudi of the Sharjah Federal Court of Appeal, with members from the Ministry of Economy and the Department of Economic Development – Abu Dhabi. Its membership term is three years and may be renewed for similar terms by Cabinet resolution. The Resolution also deals with vacancies, continuity of duties after term expiry, and circumstances in which membership may be terminated. These governance details matter because parties need confidence that a grievance body is not ad hoc, vague, or improvised each time a dispute appears. When the legal framework names the chair, identifies the members, and sets a term of office, it gives the process a more institutional character.
The Resolution also includes a conflict-of-interest rule, which is especially important in a specialist IP environment where professionals, experts, public bodies, and private companies may overlap across projects. Each Committee member must disclose any personal, financial, or other relationship that may compromise impartiality with a party submitting a grievance. If such an interest exists, that member must refrain from participating in the hearing, and the Committee issues its decision without that member’s vote. For applicants, this is a quiet but meaningful safeguard. Patent disputes often involve high-value technology, licensing negotiations, and competitive commercial interests, so confidence in impartiality is not a nice-to-have; it is part of the legal value of the system itself.
Decisions, Notifications, and Court Options
One of the strongest features of the new framework is the requirement for a reasoned decision. Cabinet Resolution No. 36 of 2025 states that the Committee must issue decisions and recommendations by majority vote, and that its decisions must be reasoned and accurately explained, specifying the grounds and justifications for each decision. The Committee must issue its final decision within sixty days from the date of grievance submission, and the decision must include a summary of the grievance and the rationale on which the decision is based. The Secretary must then serve the final decision on both the grievant and the Ministry’s competent department within fifteen working days from issuance through modern means of communication. This is exactly the kind of procedural discipline that applicants and investors want to see because it gives them a clearer idea of when a disputed issue may move forward.
Court strategy still needs careful legal advice because not every industrial property dispute follows the same path. Federal Law No. 11 of 2021 defines the competent court as the Abu Dhabi Federal Court of Appeal and states that no court action will be accepted unless the grievance route has first been used, subject to the specific rule concerning re-examination after grant for patents, utility models, and industrial designs. WIPO’s PCT Applicant’s Guide for the UAE also notes that, in the case of a negative decision of the Office during the national phase, the decision may be appealed to the competent court within sixty days from notification. The practical lesson is simple: do not assume a generic appeal deadline from a summary article. Applicants should identify the exact decision, the right procedural route, the applicable deadline, and whether re-examination, grievance, or court action is the next step.
Why the Committee Matters for Patent Strategy
For patent applicants, the Committee changes how prosecution strategy should be managed after a negative or disputed decision. It is no longer enough to focus only on filing the application and responding to examination reports. Applicants now need a post-decision plan that considers whether to request re-examination, whether to file a grievance, what evidence should be preserved, and how the administrative record may affect later court options. This is particularly important because Federal Law No. 11 of 2021 provides that a patent or utility model certificate is granted if no objection is raised by filing an application for re-examination after grant or filing a grievance within the time limit set by the Executive Regulations. In other words, the post-grant and post-decision period is not dead time; it is a live risk window.
A strong patent strategy should now include a deadline matrix for every UAE industrial property matter. The matrix should track Ministry notifications, publication dates, re-examination windows, grievance deadlines, evidence deadlines, decision dates, and court-related deadlines where applicable. It should also identify who is responsible for collecting technical evidence and who will approve legal arguments before filing. This may sound basic, but many IP disputes are lost in the gaps between technical teams, legal teams, business teams, and outside counsel. The Committee’s 60-working-day filing window gives applicants enough time to prepare properly, but not enough time to be casual. The difference between a rushed grievance and a disciplined grievance may be the difference between keeping an innovation protected and watching a valuable right slip into uncertainty.
Business Impact for UAE Innovation
The Committee arrives at a time when UAE patent activity is becoming more commercially important. WIPO’s latest UAE IP statistical country profile reports 3,598 total patent applications for the UAE in 2024, up 5.7%, with 1,508 patent grants, up 18.2%. The Ministry of Economy and Tourism has also stated that patent applications submitted in the UAE reached approximately 3,622 in 2024, while its Green IP roadmap aims to raise the share of sustainable and environmental innovation patents to 8% of total patent registrations. These numbers tell a simple story: the system is getting busier, and when a system gets busier, dispute resolution has to become more structured. A growing patent environment without a predictable grievance process is like a highway with no clear exits; it may work when traffic is light, but it becomes risky as volume increases.
The UAE is also working to make patent prosecution faster and more aligned with international practice. In July 2025, the Ministry of Economy and Tourism and the United States Patent and Trademark Office signed a Statement of Intent to launch a joint patent grant programme aimed at accelerating patent grant procedures in the UAE. The Ministry described this broader direction as supporting “leadership and competitiveness in innovation and IP rights in the UAE.” That makes the Grievance Committee part of a wider modernisation picture, not an isolated procedural tweak. Faster grants are useful, but faster grants also need credible challenge mechanisms. When speed and review work together, the system becomes more attractive to inventors, universities, investors, manufacturers, and technology companies that need both efficiency and legal certainty.
Practical Checklist for Applicants and Rights Holders
Applicants should treat the Industrial Property Grievance Committee as a serious procedural forum, not as a formality. The first step is to review the Ministry decision immediately and identify the date of notification, because that date may start the 60-working-day grievance clock under Cabinet Resolution No. 36 of 2025. The second step is to decide whether the matter requires re-examination after grant before a grievance can be considered, particularly for patents, utility model certificates, and industrial designs. Federal Law No. 11 of 2021 specifically states that, subject to Article 17(2), the Committee will not consider a grievance relating to registration of those rights unless the concerned party first raises an objection before the ICPR by filing an application for re-examination after grant. This is exactly where applicants should avoid DIY procedural guesses.
A practical applicant file should include the decision under challenge, proof of notification, application details, prosecution history, technical evidence, legal grounds, requested remedy, and any documents showing commercial or technical relevance. Foreign applicants should also make sure their UAE representative is properly authorised, because WIPO’s UAE PCT guidance notes that non-resident applicants must appoint an agent in the UAE. If the case involves a high-value patent family, applicants should coordinate UAE arguments with parallel prosecution or opposition positions in other jurisdictions. Patent files have long memories: a statement made in one country can sometimes influence how competitors frame disputes elsewhere. The cleanest approach is to prepare the grievance as if it may later be read by a court, an investor, a licensee, or a future litigation team.
Conclusion
The establishment of the UAE’s Industrial Property Grievance Committee is a meaningful step in the country’s ongoing IP modernisation journey. It gives applicants and interested parties a more defined administrative process for challenging decisions issued under the industrial property framework, with clear rules around filing, evidence, hearings, expert input, decision-making, and notification. Just as importantly, it gives innovators more confidence that disputed patent and industrial property decisions can be reviewed through a formal structure before court action becomes necessary. For businesses, this is not just a legal update; it is a planning update, because patent value depends heavily on timing, certainty, and the ability to respond when something goes wrong.
The practical message is clear: applicants should prepare early, track deadlines carefully, and treat every Ministry decision as a potential trigger for procedural action. The new Committee does not remove the need for strong technical drafting, careful prosecution, or strategic legal advice. What it does offer is a clearer route for grievances, and that can make the UAE’s IP system more predictable for inventors, founders, universities, R&D teams, and international rights holders. In a market where innovation is moving quickly, predictability is not boring. It is the foundation that lets businesses take bigger, smarter risks.
FAQs
1. What is the official name of the UAE patent appellate body?
The official name used in Cabinet Resolution No. 36 of 2025 is the Industrial Property Grievance Committee. Some articles may describe it as an appellate board because it reviews grievances against industrial property decisions, but the official terminology is “Committee.” This distinction is useful because the Committee operates as an administrative grievance body within the UAE industrial property framework rather than as a standalone court. Its procedures, membership, filing rules, and decision timelines are set out in Cabinet Resolution No. 36 of 2025.
2. How long does an applicant have to file a grievance?
A grievance must be submitted within sixty working days from the date the concerned party is notified of the decision. This deadline appears in Article 8 of Cabinet Resolution No. 36 of 2025 and should be tracked carefully from the notification date, not from an internal review date or a later business discussion. The grievance must also be filed using the prescribed form and supported with documents and evidence. Missing the deadline may affect the party’s ability to use the administrative grievance route.
3. Can the Committee ask for more documents?
Yes, the Committee may ask the Ministry or the grievant to submit additional information, clarifications, documents, or other materials related to the dispute. This is important because the first filing may not be the only opportunity to complete the record, but applicants should still submit a strong file from the beginning. The Committee may also allow new evidence if it could materially affect the grievance. In patent matters, that may include technical analysis, prior art materials, declarations, translations, or prosecution history documents depending on the issue.
4. When will the Committee issue its decision?
The Committee must issue its final decision within sixty days from the date the grievance is submitted. The decision must be reasoned, accurately explained, and include the grounds and justifications for the outcome. After the decision is issued, the Secretary must serve it on the grievant and the Ministry’s competent department within fifteen working days using modern means of communication. This gives applicants a more predictable administrative timeline than an open-ended review process.
5. Does the grievance process replace court action?
No, the grievance process does not replace court action in every case, but it may be a required step before court proceedings can be accepted. Federal Law No. 11 of 2021 states that, subject to the specific re-examination rule, no action shall be accepted before the courts unless a grievance has first been filed before the Committee. The same law defines the competent court as the Abu Dhabi Federal Court of Appeal. Applicants should therefore take advice on the exact route and deadline that applies to their specific Ministry decision.
Oman Obtains International Geographical Indication Recognition for Frankincense
Oman has secured international geographical indication protection for Omani frankincense through the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), further strengthening the recognition and protection of one of the country’s most iconic natural products.
Derived from Boswellia sacra trees native to the Dhofar region, Omani frankincense has long been valued for its distinctive aroma, quality, and historical significance. For centuries, it has played an important role in regional trade and remains closely associated with Oman’s cultural heritage.
The international registration provides enhanced recognition of the connection between the product and its geographical origin while extending protection through the framework established under the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement. This helps safeguard the designation against misuse and supports the preservation of the product’s authenticity and reputation.
The development reflects the growing role of geographical indications as a tool for protecting origin-linked products, promoting regional identity, and creating long-term economic value through intellectual property rights.
Saudi Arabia has modernized its intellectual property framework through the enactment of a new Copyright Law pursuant to Royal Decree No. M/169, published in the Official Gazette (Umm Al-Qura) on February 13, 2026. This legislation replaces the Copyright Law of 2003 and aligns the Kingdom’s regime with international standards, digital economy requirements, and the objectives of Vision 2030.
The new law is scheduled to enter into force in 12 August 2026 (approximately 180 days after publication). During this transitional period, the Saudi Authority for Intellectual Property (SAIP) is expected to issue detailed Implementing Regulations. Until the effective date, the 2003 framework, supplemented by existing SAIP regulations, continues to apply.
Principal Updates and Key Provisions
1. Expanded Territorial Scope (30-Day Rule) The new law broadens copyright protection to works first published in Saudi Arabia and to foreign works subsequently published in the Kingdom within 30 days of their initial foreign release. This strengthens safeguards for international rights holders.
2. Strengthened Moral Rights Moral rights are reinforced as perpetual, inalienable, and non-waivable. They include the right to first public disclosure, attribution (including pseudonyms), objection to distortion or misuse prejudicial to the author’s honor or reputation, and the right to petition courts for withdrawal of a work for serious reasons. These rights pass to legal heirs upon the author’s death.
3. Clarification of Work-for-Hire Ownership Economic rights in works created by employees within the scope of their employment and related to the employer’s business activities automatically vest in the employer, subject to contrary written agreements. This provides greater corporate clarity.
4. Software, Databases, and Licensing The law affirms the enforceability of standard software, mobile application, and database licenses, provided they comply with Saudi public order and morals.
5. Text and Data Mining Exception for AI A targeted exception permits the reproduction of lawfully acquired works for AI training and development, subject to conditions that the use be limited, lawful, and not unreasonably prejudicial to the rights holder’s interests.
6. Safe Harbor for Online Platforms Limitations on liability are introduced for internet service providers and digital platforms regarding passive technical functions, provided they lack actual knowledge of infringement and act expeditiously upon formal notice.
7. Enhanced Enforcement and Penalties Penalties have been significantly strengthened, including higher fines (up to SAR 1 million per violation, or SAR 2 million for repeats), extended imprisonment terms, and improved civil remedies.
Strategic Implications for Organizations
Businesses should:
Audit AI training data workflows for compliance with the new exception.
Update employment contracts and IP policies to reflect work-for-hire provisions.
Implement robust notice-and-takedown systems for platform compliance.
Strengthen licensing audits and overall IP governance.
Monitor SAIP implementing regulations closely during the transition.
The new framework signals a clear advancement toward stronger enforcement, digital alignment, and innovation support.
Should you require any assistance, further information, or clarification regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact us.
These days, the prevailing conversation around AI focuses on user-level applications in day-to-day work. But the focus at AMCHAM’s MENA Regional Conference in Dubai last week was something quite different: the UAE as one of the most fertile environments globally for AI platform deployment.
The conference brought together stakeholders from AI technology, capital markets, government, construction, infrastructure, and intellectual property. The unifying theme was clear. Since the launch of the UAE National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence 2031, the country has been methodically setting the stage to host AI not merely in terms of application software, but as comprehensive infrastructure.
The UAE’s AI Strategy Is About Platforms, Not Applications
The UAE National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence 2031 was launched a few years ago by the Ministry of State for Artificial Intelligence. It sets out a clear and particularly comprehensive roadmap. Its eight stated objectives are not framed around applications or software alone, but around building a complete AI ecosystem:
Objective 1: Build a global reputation as an AI destination
Objective 2: Strengthen competitive assets in priority sectors through AI
Objective 3: Develop a fertile, end-to-end AI ecosystem
Objective 4: Embed AI across customer services and operations
Objective 5: Attract and train talent for AI-enabled jobs
Objective 6: Anchor world-leading research in target industries
Objective 7: Provide the data and infrastructure needed to operate as a real-world AI test bed
Objective 8: Ensure strong governance and effective regulation
The UAE is particularly unique and attractive as a host for AI platforms because it has all the resources that are needed coupled with the ability to roll them out quickly and efficiently.
AI Is a Layered System, Not a Single Asset
Advanced AI is not a single piece of software. It is a deeply layered, continuously evolving system spanning energy, data centres, hardware, networks, models, deployment tooling, and real-world outputs.
Each layer introduces discrete technical challenges—and corresponding opportunities and needs for durable IP protection. In practice, some of the strongest and most enforceable IP arises not inside the model itself, but at the interfaces between layers, where systems integrate, scale, and interact with physical or regulated environments.
What the UAE is facilitating under its AI 2031 strategy is the full stack required to support this reality.
Where IP Value Is Being Created
In platform-based AI environments, protectable innovation commonly arises across:
Energy: Power, cooling, and energy-optimized infrastructure
Infrastructure: Data-centre architecture and fault-tolerant systems
Technical layer: Hardware-software interaction and compute orchestration
Data management: Networking, latency management, and secure data movement
Operational layer: Deployment, monitoring, explainability, and safety tooling
AI deliverables: domain-specific outputs embedded in real-world systems
A narrow focus on application software alone risks missing much of this value. A layered platform demands a layered IP strategy.
The Strategic Takeaway
The UAE is not positioning itself as a place to simply use AI. It is positioning itself as a place to build AI platforms at scale.
For organizations and joint ventures developing or deploying AI in the region, the implication is clear: IP protection must extend across the entire platform, not just the application layer.
*David Aylen is a Canadian IP lawyer now based in the UAE. While practicing in Canada, he was certified in 1998 as a Specialist in Patents-Trademarks-Copyright. He is also the holder of certificates in IP strategy and Patents from WIPO. He now serves as counsel to United Trademark & Patent Services
