The Qatar International Court and Dispute Resolution Centre has issued two new Practice Directions dealing with default judgment and the hourly rate recoverable by litigants in person. The update is procedural, but it carries a wider practical point for international commercial disputes: where a party wants judgment without a defended hearing, the court will expect proper evidence that the claim has been served. The QICDRC update on default judgment and litigants-in-person hourly rates was published on 23 June 2026.
For businesses and individuals involved in cross-border litigation, including those with assets, counterparties or enforcement interests in England and Wales, procedural detail can be decisive. A strong claim can be delayed, challenged or undermined if service evidence is incomplete. Equally, a defendant who ignores proceedings may face judgment being entered without a contested hearing.
What has the QICDRC announced?
On 23 June 2026, the QICDRC announced two new Practice Directions for 2026. The first concerns default judgment under article 22 of the Rules and Procedures of the QFC Civil and Commercial Court. The second concerns the hourly rate that litigants in person may claim where they have a costs order in their favour.
The Practice Direction on default judgment confirms that, where a defendant fails to file a defence, a claimant may apply for default judgment in eligible monetary claims, subject to the Court’s discretion. The Practice Direction also requires the claimant to file a witness statement addressing service of the claim under article 18 of the Rules. Without that witness statement, default judgment will not be granted.
This is a useful reminder that default judgment is not simply an administrative step. The claimant must show that the procedural basis for judgment is sound.
What is default judgment and why does service evidence matter?
Default judgment is judgment entered where a defendant has failed to take a required procedural step, usually by not filing a defence within the applicable time limit.
- In practical terms, it can allow a claimant to obtain judgment without a full contested trial.
- That can be valuable where the debt or claim is clear and the defendant has not engaged.
- However, the court will still need to be satisfied that the defendant had proper notice of the proceedings and that the procedural requirements have been met.
Service evidence matters because it is the foundation for fairness. A court is more likely to scrutinise default judgment carefully where the defendant is overseas, where service was via electronic means or where the defendant later says it did not receive the claim.
What does the new QFC Practice Direction mean for claimants?
For claimants, the message is straightforward. A default judgment application should be prepared as an evidence-based application, not treated as a formality.
The claimant will need to show that the claim was served and that the defendant failed to respond in the required way. The QICDRC update expressly states that the witness statement must address service of the claim, and that default judgment will not be granted without it.
That requirement is commercially important.
- A claimant who cannot prove service may lose time, incur further costs and face avoidable argument.
- Where a judgment may later need to be enforced against assets in England and Wales, the quality of the underlying process may also become relevant if the debtor seeks to resist recognition or enforcement.
Businesses pursuing cross-border claims should therefore preserve a clear record of service, correspondence, addresses used, delivery evidence and any electronic transmission records. The more international the dispute, the more important that paper trail becomes.
Why should defendants take default judgment risk seriously?
For defendants, the update is a reminder that doing nothing is rarely neutral.
Where a defendant fails to file a defence, the claimant may seek judgment in default if the relevant conditions are met. Once judgment has been entered, the dispute can move quickly from liability to enforcement. That can affect bank accounts, assets, trading relationships and credit positions. Early advice on commercial litigation and dispute resolution can help a defendant understand whether to engage, challenge jurisdiction or seek more time.
A defendant who receives a foreign court claim should take early advice before deciding whether to engage, challenge jurisdiction, seek more time or defend the claim. The right response will depend on the contract, the forum clause, the governing law, the method of service and the nature of the claim.
Ignoring proceedings can make the position harder to control. Even where there may be jurisdictional or substantive arguments, those arguments are usually stronger when raised promptly.
What does the litigants-in-person costs update change?
The second Practice Direction deals with costs for litigants in person. The Practice Direction on litigants-in-person hourly rates states that, a litigant in person can seek an hourly rate of QAR 200 per hour. The Registrar has discretion to apply a higher hourly rate where applying the standard rate would clearly be inappropriate, and the rate will be reviewed periodically.
This gives court users a clearer framework for litigants-in-person costs recovery. Although the figure itself is specific to the QICDRC, the broader point is familiar across commercial litigation: time spent dealing with proceedings may have cost consequences, even where a party is not legally represented.
FWJ comment
The QICDRC update is a reminder that procedural discipline matters in commercial litigation. Default judgment can be an effective route where a defendant has failed to engage, but it depends on getting the basics right.
- For claimants, that means building a clear service record before applying for judgment.
- For defendants, it means taking court documents seriously, even where the claim is issued abroad. .
In cross-border disputes, early advice can help preserve options, avoid procedural missteps and keep enforcement strategy aligned with the commercial objective
Where judgment has already been obtained, parties should consider the practical steps involved in enforcing a court judgment, including the location of assets, the identity of the debtor and the procedural route available.
