The stop payment orders from the issuer of a check to his bank are only valid in two specific cases.
Image Credit: Agency

Dubai: Stop payment instructions from the issuer of a check to his bank are no longer valid, except in two specific circumstances, according to the new amendment to the Law on Commercial Transactions which will come into force on January 2, 2022 .

A chargeback notice, or a “check protest” as referred to in banking jargon, means that the drawer of a check issues an order to the bank not to pay the value of the check to bearer.

In accordance with the Law on Commercial Transactions, the legislator in principle prohibits the drawer from ordering his drawn bank not to pay the value of the bearer check, the rights of which include the consideration for the payment (the balance).


The UAE Central Bank clarified that in some cases, lawmakers allow a drawer to protest (give the bank an opposition order) for not paying the value of a check.

The amended law allows two types of check payment protest: one for the benefit of a check holder who has lost a check against their will, such as the stolen or lost check. While the second type follows a declaration of bankruptcy, when a bankrupt is prevented from managing his funds and disposing of them, in order to protect his creditors.

The first case is a protest in case of theft or loss of the check. The holder of the check may object to the drawn bank against payment of the value of the check, if the check is stolen or lost, or obtained by fraudulent means. In this case, the request to stop payment (protest) can be made either by the drawer himself, or by the bearer of the check following the theft or loss of the check.


The new amendment to the Law on Commercial Transactions also redefines the banking secrecy and confidentiality clauses.

Under the new provisions, a statement by a bank employee that there is not enough funds for the value of the check / part of the value of the check is not considered a violation of banking secrecy, as long as that this statement is within the limits of this statement.

“There is no violation of bank secrecy, as long as the bank employee’s declaration that there is not enough funds, or that there is a part of it in the account of the drawer / customer to cash the check is limited to that only, without reference to other data, ”according to a CBUAE memo.

No legal recourse

According to the amended law, when a bank issues a certificate of partial payment to the bearer / beneficiary of the check or declares that the funds are insufficient to cash the check, it is not a disclosure of the client’s account secrecy, provided that the bank’s statement is limited to that statement, without extending to other account information, or that the customer has other accounts.

The customer is not allowed to sue the bank for disclosing the confidentiality of the account, as long as the bank has complied with the eligibility limits.

On the other hand, the law punishes a bank employee who refuses to cash a valid check without reason, or who refrains from specifying a reason for refusing to honor a check, or who refrains from making a partial payment. , or who refrains from issuing a certificate to this effect, or who refrains from delivering the original check.