Are WhatsApp Messages Admissible in UAE Courts

The agreement was made on WhatsApp. The price, the deadline, the change to the scope, all of it sits in a chat on your phone. The other side now denies the conversation ever happened. Or says the messages prove nothing because they are only screenshots.

WhatsApp messages are admissible in UAE courts. That question was settled by Federal Decree-Law No. 35 of 2022 Promulgating the Law of Evidence in Civil and Commercial Transactions, in force since 2 January 2023. The real question is what weight the messages carry and whether you can produce them in a form the court will accept.

The Law Names Them Directly

Article 53 defines electronic evidence as any evidence derived from data or information generated, stored, extracted, copied, transmitted, reported or received through means of information technology on any medium, which is retrievable in an understandable way.

Article 54 lists what counts. It includes electronic correspondence and emails, plus modern means of communication. A WhatsApp exchange sits inside that list.

Article 55 then does the important work. Electronic evidence is subject to the same provisions as documentary evidence. There is no separate lower category for messages. They are treated as documents.

What Weight They Actually Carry

Under Article 59, electronic evidence has the same probative value as an informal instrument, which means a signed private document rather than a notarised one. Article 57 gives informal electronic evidence validity between the parties to a transaction in three situations: where it was issued in accordance with the legislation, where it was generated from an electronic means named in the contract in dispute or where it came from an electronic means that is authenticated or publicly available.

Article 29 supports the same position from the documentary side. Correspondence that is signed or proved to be attributed to the sender carries the probative value of an informal instrument unless the sender proves he did not send it or cause it to be sent.

Article 58 places the burden where most people assume it does not sit. The party who alleges that the electronic evidence is invalid has to prove that allegation. Saying the chat is fabricated is not a defence. Establishing it is.

The Handset Matters More Than the Screenshot

This is where most claims are lost. It has nothing to do with whether WhatsApp is accepted.

Article 60 requires electronic evidence to be produced in its original format or by another electronic means, with the court able to ask for its content in writing where the nature of the evidence allows. Article 63 gives an extract the same probative value as the evidence itself, but only so far as the extract is identical to the electronic record it came from.

So a screenshot is not worthless. It carries the weight of the underlying chat only where it can be shown to match it. That is why the device, the export file and the metadata matter. A party who produces forty screenshots and no way of tying them to a live record is asking the court to take his word for it.

Article 61 completes the picture and it cuts both ways. Where a party refuses without an acceptable excuse to produce what the court requires in order to verify electronic evidence, he either forfeits the right to rely on it or it becomes valid against him. Refusing to hand over the phone is a decision with a consequence attached.

Proving the Messages Are His

Denial of attribution is the standard defence. The number is not mine. The account is not mine. Somebody else had the phone.

That argument is weaker in the UAE than elsewhere, because mobile numbers here are tied to identity documents and are used for government and banking transactions. Where attribution is genuinely disputed, the court can ask the relevant authorities who holds the number. It can also appoint an expert under Part 10 of the Evidence Law to examine the device and the record.

Article 62 covers the situation where authenticity cannot be verified for a reason that is not the fault of either party. In that case the court assesses the probative value of the evidence according to the circumstances of the case, which means the messages do not simply disappear from the file.

Where Messages Carry the Most Weight

Article 66 requires any transaction exceeding AED 50,000 or of indeterminate value to be established in writing. Testimony evidence is not admissible to prove the existence or termination of such a transaction unless an agreement or a provision allows it.

Read that together with Article 55. Since electronic evidence is treated as documentary evidence, a WhatsApp record is capable of satisfying a requirement for writing. That converts an informal exchange into the thing a claim above AED 50,000 cannot proceed without.

Article 68 adds a further route. Testimony is allowed in cases that should have been proved in writing where a principle of documentary evidence exists, electronic or paper. A partial or incomplete chat that does not prove the whole agreement can still open the door to witness evidence that does.

A File That Turned on a Deleted Chat

A supplier and a customer agree a variation of AED 180,000 by WhatsApp. Nothing else is signed. The relationship deteriorates and the customer says the variation was never approved. The supplier arrives with screenshots taken on the day, forwarded to a colleague at the time. The customer says his side of the conversation no longer exists.

The supplier's position is stronger than it looks, because the deletion is the customer's problem rather than his. When a matter of this kind reaches me as a Legal Consultant, the assessment starts with six things:

1. Whether the original device holding the chat is still available, working and untouched
2. Whether a full chat export exists rather than screenshots of selected messages
3. Whether the number can be tied to the other party through documents already in the file
4. Whether the exchange is complete enough to show the agreement or merely enough to support other evidence
5. Whether anything in the contract names an electronic means for communication between the parties
6. What the other side has already said in writing about the same conversation

People assume the fight will be about whether a court accepts WhatsApp. It rarely is. The fight is about whether what you kept is the record or a picture of it. That is decided long before anyone files a claim.

There is more on this subject on the page covering civil claims and evidence in the UAE.