PRELIMINARY MEASURES IN ELECTRONIC ENFORCEMENT A COMPARATIVE CIVIL- AND PROCEDURAL-LAW STUDY OF EGYPT AND THE UNITED ARAB EMIRATES (DUBAI)

Resumo

compulsory enforcement still depends on paper-era assumptions about titles, service, and the mechanics of coercion. This article re-frames electronic enforcement as an interface between substantive civil-law rights (the creditor’s claim, the debtor’s liability, and the civil consequences of abusive measures) and procedural technique (opening the enforcement file, service, and interim restraints). Using a doctrinal and functional comparative method, the study analyses the Egyptian position and contrasts it with the Emirate of Dubai within the UAE federal framework, with particular attention to the 2025 legislative reforms and to the new UAE Civil Transactions Law. It argues that ‘electronic enforcement’ cannot be evaluated by speed alone. A credible system must ensure (i) a verifiable electronic executory title, (ii) a legally meaningful digital domicile for service, (iii) a calibrated toolkit of preliminary measures (freezing, attachment, travel restraint, and related orders) that remains proportionate to the underlying civil right, and (iv) civil liability pathways for wrongful or excessive measures. The article concludes by proposing drafting solutions that connect civil-law concepts (good faith, abuse of right, and the creditor’s general guarantee) with procedural safeguards (traceability, contestability, and judicial control).