The U.A.E and Republic of South Korea have not entered into a bi-lateral treaty under which they are obliged to recognise each other's court orders or judgments. The U.A.E rarely recognises/enforces the judgment of foreign courts where there is no such treaty in place
The rehabilitation proceedings and bankruptcy protection obtained by Hanjin in the Republic of South Korea are, therefore, unlikely to be recognised and enforced in the UAE. In addition, under U.A.E law, there are no equivalent provisions to the Korean rehabilitation proceedings, and so Hanjin will be unable to obtain a court order from a court in the U.A.E granting similar relief.
Accordingly, there is nothing stopping Hanjin's creditors from arresting a Hanjin-owned vessel (and in certain circumstances a Hanjin- chartered vessel), as security for their claims, in the U.A.E, provided there are grounds for an arrest under the U.A.E Maritime Code. Given the litigation risk in the U.A.E, the risk to creditors is that a U.A.E Court may take jurisdiction over the underlying dispute. This could actually work in the creditors' favour because it may take the debt owed to the creditors out of the Korean rehabilitation proceedings, as the security, depending on the form that it is provided in, may be considered as not being a part of Hanjin's assets, and any judgment the creditors may obtain in the U.A.E would be enforceable against that security.