United Arab Emirates

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has made significant changes in its family law legislation within the last five years, including passing two new laws together with their respective executive regulation...

We are pleased to announce that Matouk Bassiouny (“MB”) acted as legal counsel to Spark Education Platform (“SEP”) in connection with securing a landmark strategic partnership with First School Management (“FSM”), the global advisory arm of GEMS Education (“GEMS”). This strategic collaboration will introduce GEMS-branded schools to Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, expanding access to high-quality education through a range of international curricula across the GCC. The deal marks a significant milestone in SEP’s wider plan to raise educational standards throughout the region. The MB team advising on the deal was led by Mohamed Esam (Partner, Head of Corporate and M&A UAE and FinTech ECVC) and included Moustafa Rizk (Senior Associate). For more about Matouk Bassiouny, check out our website at https://matoukbassiouny.com/.

We are pleased to announce that Stefano Beghi has joined Matouk Bassiouny as Of Counsel in the Corporate and M&A practice group in our Dubai office. Stefano brings over three decades of experience advising clients across the EMEA region on corporate, commercial, and M&A matters. Having worked extensively in Asia and the UAE for almost fifteen years, he offers a strong command of the local legal environment, complemented by a global outlook and cross-border execution capabilities. Stefano previously served as a partner in the international M&A practice at Seyfarth Shaw, held senior partner roles at Gianni & Origoni, where he helped lead operations in Italy, India, Hong Kong, and Shanghai, and also spent a decade with Ernst & Young and Andersen Legal in Europe. His cross-border capabilities and cultural fluency make him a trusted advisor to multinationals navigating high-value transactions and strategic investments. We are confident that Stefano’s joining will further strengthen our regional offering and enhance the value we deliver to clients across industries and borders. For more on Stefano’s background and expertise, visit: https://matoukbassiouny.com/counsel-profile/stefano-beghi/.

We are pleased to announce that Matouk Bassiouny (“MB”) acted as legal counsel to Development Partners International’s Nclude Fund in connection with its participation in Nawy’s USD 52 million Series A funding round. The Series A round will enable Nawy to accelerate product development, integrate AI into its operations, and pursue its vision of acquiring smaller businesses. The MB team advising on the transaction was led by Mohamed Essam (Partner, Head of Corporate and M&A UAE Offices and ECVC) and included Moustafa Rizk (Senior Associate). For more about Matouk Bassiouny, check out our website at https://matoukbassiouny.com/.

A junior associate sits in front of two screens. One shows a lease agreement. The other, an AI tool scanning for gaps. Within seconds, it flags vague terms, missing clauses, and possible risk points. What once took hours now takes minutes. This scene is becoming common in legal offices around the world. AI tools are being used to review documents, research case law, sort files, and even help respond to client queries. Scenes like this are no longer rare. AI is being used to review documents, research case law, draft contracts, and even answer client questions. Legal work is changing fast. This article looks at how that change is playing out, especially in contract drafting. Can AI help lawyers work faster without weakening the legal strength of the document? And in places like the UAE, where enforceability depends on local rules, what happens when software takes the lead? AI and the evolution of contract work AI tools are now built into the way many legal teams handle contracts. Some firms use them to generate first drafts. Others use them to check terms against clause banks or flag gaps before sending a document out. Turnaround times have improved. So has consistency. Lawyers no longer have to rewrite the same clause ten times or scan 80 pages to spot a risk. The software is trained on large volumes of contract data. It can suggest fallback clauses, predict what might be missing, or pull terms based on similar agreements. This has changed how lawyers work, especially on high-volume contracts like NDAs, leases, and employment terms. But these tools don’t always reflect the legal rules of a specific country. Many are trained on US or UK law. They tend to favour generic language that reads well but doesn’t always hold up in court. That’s where problems can start, especially in places like the UAE, where the enforceability of a contract depends on mandatory provisions that aren’t always obvious to a machine. Why enforceability still depends on human review In the UAE, a contract isn’t valid just because both sides sign it. It has to meet certain rules set out in the Civil Code. Some of these rules can’t be waived, even if both parties agree. That’s where AI can fall short. A lease clause might sound reasonable to an AI tool trained on UK property law. But if it contradicts a UAE tenancy law, it could be unenforceable. The same goes for joint venture agreements. AI might add familiar boilerplate wording that works elsewhere, but in the UAE, it might clash with local rules or miss requirements that courts expect to see. The risk isn’t that the AI makes a clear mistake. It’s that it fills in the blanks with terms that seem fine, but don’t match how things work here. Machines can’t always account for legal context or judge whether a clause fits local practice. That still needs a lawyer’s eye, especially in cross-border contracts or high-stakes agreements where a vague clause can turn into a dispute. Is AI ‘legal advice’? Not yet, but it matters AI can write a contract. It can even rewrite it, compare it to past versions, and flag missing clauses. But it doesn’t give legal advice. That responsibility still rests with the lawyer. And when something goes wrong, that’s where the question of liability comes in. If a lawyer relies on AI to draft a contract and misses a key error, the client won’t blame the software. They’ll blame the person who signed off on it. Courts are unlikely to excuse poor legal work on the basis that “the AI suggested it.” That’s not how accountability works. This makes transparency important. Clients should know when AI tools are involved and how the work was reviewed. Legal tech can improve speed and consistency, but it doesn’t replace legal judgment. That’s especially true here in the UAE, where enforceability can depend on details the software isn’t built to catch. AI can help with the heavy lifting, but it doesn’t carry the weight of professional responsibility. Wider impact: AI and the day-to-day of legal work AI is now being used far beyond contract work. It’s being used to scan case law, summarise decisions, draft memos, and even suggest litigation strategies. In-house teams use it to weigh legal risks before deals close. Startups rely on AI-driven templates to cut down legal fees. Law firms are adapting. Some have built entire internal systems around AI to speed up reviews or sort documents in complex disputes. It’s saving time, which helps keep costs down. At the same time, it’s changing the skills lawyers need. They spend less time sifting through files and more time thinking through what the output means. Judges are also seeing the shift. Some court documents now arrive part machine-written. UAE courts haven’t pushed back against the use of tech, but they still assess contracts and pleadings in familiar ways. They look for intention, mutual consent, and clear terms. AI can help bring clarity faster, but it still has to fit within that legal frame. The human part still matters. The future: Smarter tools, smarter lawyers AI is changing legal work, but it’s not replacing legal judgment. The tools keep improving, yet the person using them still carries the weight of interpretation, context, and risk. That’s especially true in the UAE, where enforceability hinges on local rules and mandatory clauses. A well-drafted clause in one system might fall flat in another. As the tech sharpens, the lawyer’s role becomes less about finding the answer and more about knowing which answers work, and where.