Constitutional Court upholds judicial fees law, rejects challenge, affirms legislative authority
The Consultative Chamber of Kuwait’s Constitutional Court has rejected an appeal challenging the constitutionality of amendments to the Judicial Fees Law, effectively upholding legislation that had sparked widespread legal debate.
In its ruling issued on February 11, 2026, chaired by Court President Adel Ali Al-Bahwa, the chamber affirmed that the contested provisions fall within the legislator’s discretionary authority to regulate judicial services in pursuit of the public interest, while remaining within constitutional limits.
The court concluded that claims alleging violations of constitutional articles lacked a valid legal basis and ruled the appeal inadmissible, ordering the confiscation of the financial guarantee submitted with the case, reports Al-Jarida daily.
The chamber explained that increasing judicial fees is legally permissible as part of the state’s authority to impose charges for services provided by public institutions. Court fees, it noted, represent compensation for expenses incurred by the state in delivering judicial services and help ensure their efficient and responsible use.
According to the ruling, lawmakers sought to maintain a balance between safeguarding the constitutional right to litigation and ensuring the seriousness of cases brought before the courts. The judges emphasized that legislative authority in regulating rights is discretionary unless explicitly restricted by constitutional provisions.
Appeal Based on Fee Objection
The appellant had challenged several articles of Law No. 17 of 1973 on court fees, as amended by Decree-Law No. 78 of 2025, arguing that higher fees imposed excessive financial burdens that could discourage individuals from pursuing legal claims.
The appeal arose after the claimant filed a compensation lawsuit against the Ministry of Justice seeking 30,000 Kuwaiti dinars and was required to pay a judicial fee of 1,500 dinars.
However, the court ruled that the seriousness of an appeal is a mandatory condition for acceptance under the Constitutional Court Law. After reviewing the case, the chamber determined that the challenge did not meet this requirement.
Reform Aimed at Limiting Frivolous Lawsuits
The ruling highlighted that amendments introduced under the 2025 decree-law were designed to modernize a system that had remained unchanged for more than five decades despite major economic and social developments. Lawmakers sought to address the growing number of lawsuits and curb frivolous or malicious claims while preserving access to justice.
The revised law introduced gradual increases in proportional fees for claims with specified financial value, adjusted fixed fees for cases of unspecified value, and updated charges related to court notifications and legal procedures.
The court stressed that the amended law also reorganized exemption procedures, ensuring that litigants who can prove financial inability are exempted from paying court fees. It further clarified that the ultimate burden of fees typically falls on the losing party, as the party responsible for initiating the dispute.
Judges concluded that requiring payment of fees in exchange for judicial services does not constitute a barrier to accessing the courts nor violate constitutional guarantees of the right to litigation.
Accordingly, the Consultative Chamber ruled in chambers to reject the appeal and uphold the law, reinforcing the presumption of constitutionality surrounding the legislative amendments.
