Why Precedent Won't Save Your Claim in Saudi Arabia — Case Law is Not a Source of Law in KSA

Case law is NOT a source of Law in KSA. As such not Applicable in use in Saudi Legal Arguments.

This article was first published on LinkedIn by Lahiru Vithanachchi — Contracts & Commercial Manager | 17+ Years | FIDIC & Saudi Regulations (CTL/GTPL) Expert | NEOM & KSA Mega Project Experience | Claims & Dispute Resolution Specialist (MCIArb) | Saudi Arabia. I am reposting it here for the benefit of my readers.

…………………………………………………………………….

Why Precedent Won't Save Your Claim in KSA

Professionals moving from common law jurisdictions to Saudi Arabia often carry an assumption that doesn't transfer: that a favourable ruling in a similar case provides reliable authority for their own.

Saudi Arabia does not operate a system of binding judicial precedent. A growing body of judicial decisions exists and is being incrementally developed, but past judgments serve as guidance, not obligation. A judge is not required to follow an earlier decision on comparable facts.

For construction disputes, the practical implication is straightforward.

Your claim stands or falls on three things:

• the contract,
• the applicable law, and
• the quality of your evidence.

Not on what a different tribunal decided for a different contractor on a different project.

The Civil Transactions Law of 2023 has brought welcome codification to many principles that were previously sourced from classical fiqh texts.

That codification provides greater certainty in the rules. But the application of those rules to any given set of facts remains a matter for the individual judge or arbitrator.

This places a premium on contract administration discipline that goes beyond what many professionals are accustomed to. Contemporaneous records, properly issued notices, documented cause-and-effect — these are not just best practice in KSA.

They are the foundation of every entitlement, because there is no body of binding case law to fall back on.

The system isn't a weakness. It's a different framework, one that rewards rigour over reliance.

Would your current project records withstand scrutiny in a jurisdiction where no precedent supports your position?

…………………………………………………………………….

What the Replies Tell Us About the KSA Industry

What is interesting is the replies that Mr. Lahiru receives on his Article above. One of the replies was from:-

Muhammad Rubeel Ali, MCIArb — Contracts Manager | Arbitration & Claims | Managed & Governing SAR 7.5B+ Portfolios across KSA Mega & Giga-Projects | FIDIC | Saudi Laws (CTL & GTPL) | Member CIArb | SCE Certified

Agreed, in start of your post you highlighted a tricky part “…moving from common law jurisdictions to Saudi Arabia….” you're absolutely right.

I sat in an interview a month ago for PMC Contract Manager position. The interviewers spoke about FIDIC terms as if they were absolute statutory law. This is a gross mistake. They constantly brought up common law applications, insisting that I frame my answers through that specific legal lens.

Whenever I anchored my responses in actual Saudi Arabian law, the Programme Director abruptly snubbed me. He literally said, 'Don't tell us things as per Saudi Law.'

I believe that some 75% of Construction Claims Professionals in KSA (together with the Programme Director) are ostriches with their heads stuck in the desert sand. Perhaps the root cause of construction claims failures in KSA.

It made absolutely no sense. We are working inside KSA, not managing international contracts out of the US, UK, or Canada. Disregarding the local governing law of the host country for a major infrastructure project is incredibly shortsighted.

Exactly Muhammad Rubeel Ali. I've seen this play out on several projects, PMCs treating FIDIC as gospel and forgetting it sits under the host country's law, not above it. Many Main Contractors fall into the same trap too, and brushing off Saudi law on a major infrastructure job isn't just a bad look in an interview — it's the kind of thing that comes back to bite the project later.