Law360 Canada ( June 24, 2026, 9:41 AM EDT) -- Appeal by appellant from a decision recognizing and enforcing a foreign arbitral award. The award arose from an arbitration conducted in the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) pursuant to a loan agreement (the agreement) between the appellant and the respondent, a United Kingdom-based private equity firm. The agreement provided for arbitration under the Rules of Arbitration of the DIFC-LCIA Arbitration Centre (DIFC‑LCIA Rules). Before arbitration commenced, Dubai enacted Decree 34, abolishing the DIFC Arbitration Institute and transferring its functions to the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), which adopted new arbitration rules. The arbitration proceeded under the DIAC Rules, over the appellant’s objection, resulting in an award of more than US$2.5 million against the appellant. On enforcement, the appellant resisted recognition, arguing that the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the parties’ agreement, that he was unable to present his case due to compressed timelines, and that enforcement would be contrary to Ontario public policy. The application judge rejected all grounds and enforced the award. On appeal, the principal issue was whether the application judge erred by considering Dubai law, specifically Decree 34, when determining whether the arbitral procedure was in accordance with the parties’ agreement under Article V(1)(d) of the United Nations Conference on International Commercial Arbitration in New York on 10 June 1958 (Convention)....