Jordan offers two primary paths for resolving commercial disputes: the national court system and arbitration. Each has distinct advantages and drawbacks. The right choice depends on the size of the dispute, the relationship between the parties, confidentiality needs, and whether the resulting decision will need to be enforced internationally.
The Jordanian Court System at a Glance
Civil and commercial disputes in Jordan are heard by the Regular Courts, which operate on three levels: the Magistrate Court (for lower-value claims), the Court of First Instance, and the Court of Appeal. A final appeal on points of law lies to the Court of Cassation. The judiciary applies the Jordanian Civil Code, the Commercial Code, and sector-specific legislation.
Proceedings are conducted in Arabic, and all submissions must be in Arabic or accompanied by certified translations. The court system is available to any party without the need for a prior agreement, and judgments benefit from the enforcement apparatus of the state.
Arbitration Under Jordanian Law
Arbitration in Jordan is governed by the Arbitration Law No. 31 of 2001, as amended by Law No. 41 of 2018, which is modeled on the UNCITRAL Model Law. A company may agree to arbitrate either before a dispute arises (through an arbitration clause in the contract) or after a dispute has materialized (through a submission agreement). Arbitration can be ad hoc or administered by an institution such as the Jordan International Arbitration Centre (JIAC), established under the Jordan Chamber of Commerce, or international bodies like the ICC or LCIA.
Cost Comparison
Court fees in Jordan are calculated as a percentage of the claimed amount under the prevailing Court Fees regime. Lawyer fees are negotiated privately. Litigation can become expensive if the case extends through multiple levels of appeal.
Arbitration involves arbitrator fees (often calculated on an hourly or ad valorem basis), institutional administration fees (if applicable), venue costs, and the parties' own legal fees. For small to mid-size disputes, arbitration can be more expensive than litigation. For large, complex disputes, especially with an international dimension, arbitration is often more cost-effective when measured against the total time and resources consumed by multi-level court proceedings.
Timeline
A first-instance court case in Jordan typically takes 12 to 24 months, depending on the complexity of the case and the court's workload. Appeals can add another 12 to 18 months, and a cassation petition adds further delay. In total, a fully contested case can take three to five years from filing to final, unappealable judgment.
Arbitration is generally faster. Under Article 37 of the Jordanian Arbitration Law No. 31 of 2001 (as amended), the tribunal must render its final award within the period agreed by the parties or, failing agreement, within twelve months of the date the tribunal is fully constituted. The tribunal may, before that period expires, extend it by one or more further periods not exceeding twelve months in aggregate, unless the parties agree on a longer period; if the award is still not rendered, either party may ask the competent judge to set additional time or to terminate the arbitration. In practice, most domestic arbitrations conclude in 6 to 18 months. There is no right of appeal on the merits, though the losing party may apply to set aside the award on narrow procedural grounds.
Confidentiality
Court proceedings in Jordan are generally public. Judgments are pronounced in open court, and case files, while not freely accessible online, are part of the public record. This can be a concern for businesses that wish to keep the details of a dispute private.
Arbitration, by contrast, is inherently confidential. The proceedings, submissions, and award are private to the parties unless they agree otherwise or disclosure is required by law (for example, in set-aside or enforcement proceedings). For disputes involving trade secrets, sensitive financial information, or reputational concerns, this confidentiality is a significant advantage.
Enforceability
Jordanian court judgments are enforceable domestically through the Execution Department. Enforcing a Jordanian judgment abroad requires the cooperation of the foreign jurisdiction, often under bilateral treaties or principles of reciprocity. Jordan has reciprocal enforcement agreements with several Arab states but limited coverage elsewhere.
Arbitral awards enjoy a major enforcement advantage internationally. Jordan is a signatory to the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958), which means a Jordanian arbitral award can be enforced in over 170 countries with relative ease. Domestically, the 2018 amendments removed the previous two-tier system: a Jordan-seated award is now subject to a single-tier review at the Court of Cassation, with set-aside under Articles 49 to 51 and enforcement under Articles 53 to 54. The Court of Appeal remains the "Competent Court" only for procedural support such as the appointment or challenge of arbitrators, fee disputes, and deadline extensions under Article 2.
Appeal Options
Court judgments in Jordan are subject to a full right of appeal on both facts and law, and a further cassation appeal on points of law. This multi-tier system provides a safeguard against errors but adds time and cost.
Arbitral awards cannot be appealed on the merits. A party may only apply to set aside the award on the limited grounds specified in Article 49 of the Arbitration Law, such as invalidity of the arbitration agreement, violation of due process, the tribunal exceeding its jurisdiction, or a defect in the composition of the tribunal, together with the public-policy ground. The application must be filed within thirty days of notification of the award (Article 50). This finality is both a strength and a risk of arbitration.
When Is Litigation the Better Choice?
- The contract contains no arbitration clause and the other side refuses to agree to arbitrate.
- A company needs urgent interim relief (though arbitrators can also grant interim measures, court orders are immediately enforceable).
- The dispute involves issues of public order, criminal conduct, or third parties who are not bound by an arbitration agreement.
- The claim value is relatively low and does not justify arbitration costs.
- A company wants the precedent-setting effect of a public court judgment.
When Is Arbitration the Better Choice?
- The contract already contains an arbitration clause, so the parties are required to arbitrate.
- The dispute has an international dimension and the award may need to be enforced abroad under the New York Convention.
- Confidentiality is important to one or both sides.
- A company wants to select arbitrators with specific technical or industry expertise.
- Speed and finality are priorities, and the parties want to avoid multi-year appeals.
- The dispute is large and complex enough to justify the cost of arbitration.
When to Speak With a Lawyer
The choice between arbitration and litigation should ideally be made at the contract drafting stage, not after a dispute has already arisen. A well-drafted dispute resolution clause, specifying the seat of arbitration, the applicable rules, the number of arbitrators, and the language of proceedings, can save considerable time and cost later. Where a dispute is already underway and it is unclear which forum applies, early advice helps to avoid jurisdictional challenges.
How the Firm Advises on Forum Selection
The firm's international arbitration and litigation teams advise on forum selection and act in both court proceedings and arbitral tribunals across Jordan and the region. For advice on a specific matter, you may contact the firm.
