19/10/2026
Share:
19/10/2026
Share:
Kuwait tightens regulations on real estate payments to boost transparency and combat money laundering.
KUWAIT CITY, Oct 19: Kuwait has introduced new legal safeguards for people living in jointly owned residential properties, allowing courts to postpone partition for a specified period in qualifying cases and enabling other co-owners to purchase the share of a partner seeking division of the property.
Decree-Law No. 121 of 2026 amends Article 830 of the Civil Code issued under Decree-Law No. 67 of 1980, introducing two new provisions aimed at balancing the property rights of co-owners with humanitarian, family and social considerations.
The amendment, published on Oct 18, 2026, applies specifically to jointly owned residential properties and does not extend these new provisions to other forms of joint ownership.
The changes address situations in which a lawsuit to divide jointly owned property could leave one of the partners without a home, particularly when the property is their sole residence and their financial circumstances prevent them from purchasing suitable alternative accommodation.
At the same time, the amendment preserves the rights of co-owners who wish to end joint ownership and receive the value of their shares.
Courts may allow joint ownership to continue temporarily
Under the new Clause 3 added to Article 830, a court may, at the request of one of the partners, order that joint ownership of a residential property continue for a specified period, provided two conditions are met.
First, the partner requesting the arrangement must establish that the property is their sole residence.
Second, they must prove that their financial resources are insufficient to purchase a suitable residential property.
The provision may apply to different forms of residential accommodation, including a house, villa or apartment, provided the statutory conditions are satisfied.
The court will have discretion to determine whether the circumstances justify allowing joint ownership to continue and to set the period for which the arrangement will remain in place.
The amendment does not grant an unconditional or permanent right to prevent the division of a jointly owned home. Any partner may seek termination of the continued joint ownership by proving that either of the two required conditions no longer exists.
Consequently, if the property ceases to be the requesting partner's sole residence, or the partner's financial circumstances change sufficiently to enable them to purchase suitable alternative accommodation, another co-owner may ask the court to end the arrangement.
The provision is intended to provide temporary protection for a partner facing genuine housing difficulties without indefinitely depriving the other co-owners of their right to seek partition.
Co-owners can buy the share of a partner seeking partition
The new Clause 4 establishes a procedure allowing co-owners to retain their residential property by purchasing the share of a partner who has initiated legal proceedings to divide it.
During the partition lawsuit, any partner may ask the court to grant them ownership of the share belonging to the party seeking partition.
The price will be determined according to the value assessed by an expert appointed by the court specifically for this purpose.
The mechanism is designed to allow the partner seeking partition to receive the fair value of their share while allowing the remaining co-owners to preserve ownership of the home rather than have the property divided through the legal process.
Where several co-owners request to acquire the share, the law sets out a procedure for allocating it among them and ensuring that the required amounts are deposited within the period specified by the court.
What happens when several partners want to buy the share?
If multiple co-owners seek to purchase the share of the partner requesting partition, they may agree among themselves on the percentage of the share each wishes to acquire.
Each claimant must then deposit into the court treasury the amount corresponding to their agreed percentage of the value determined by the court-appointed expert. The deposits must be made within the period specified by the court.
If the co-owners cannot agree on how the share should be allocated among them, the law provides for the share to be divided equally among the competing claimants.
The court will then grant them a period within which to deposit the amounts corresponding to their respective portions.
This procedure is intended to prevent disagreements among the remaining partners from indefinitely delaying the resolution of the partition lawsuit.
Failure to deposit money can result in losing the purchase request
The amendment also establishes consequences for a co-owner who seeks to purchase the share but fails to deposit the required amount within the period set by the court.
If a claimant fails to make the deposit without an excuse accepted by the court, their request to acquire the share will lapse.
Ownership will then be restricted to the remaining eligible claimants, and the percentages allocated to them will be recalculated in accordance with the law.
The court will grant the remaining claimants a new period to deposit the amounts required under the revised allocation.
If the full value of the share is deposited, the court will order the transfer of ownership to the depositing partners in proportion to the respective amounts they have paid. The partition lawsuit will then be terminated.
However, if the full value is not deposited, the court will continue hearing the partition case.
The procedure therefore requires co-owners who wish to retain the property to demonstrate their financial ability and commitment within the deadlines imposed by the court.
New provisions apply to pending partition lawsuits
Article 2 of the decree-law addresses the application of the new rules to existing legal proceedings.
The provisions apply to partition lawsuits that had not been resolved by a final judgment by the date the decree entered into force.
However, an exception applies where a judgment confirming the auction of the property subject to partition had already been issued before that date.
The amendment therefore allows qualifying cases still pending before the courts to benefit from the new provisions, while excluding cases in which the specified auction-confirmation judgment had already been issued before the law took effect.
Explanatory memorandum cites constitutional protection of property and family stability
The explanatory memorandum accompanying the decree-law states that the Constitution protects private property while also recognising its social function and the importance of preserving family and social stability.
It refers to constitutional principles that safeguard property rights, protect the family as the foundation of society and emphasise compassion among citizens.
According to the memorandum, these principles require a balance between an individual's right to dispose of their property and the wider social consequences that may arise when residential property is divided.
The memorandum notes that the practical experience of residential partition lawsuits has revealed cases in which applying the general rules of division could have consequences extending beyond the distribution of financial assets.
For some co-owners, the property represents not merely a jointly owned asset but their only home and the foundation of their residential and family stability.
The legislator therefore considered it necessary to introduce limited safeguards for people whose housing circumstances make immediate partition particularly difficult.
Protection for vulnerable residents without denying other partners' rights
The memorandum explains that Clause 3 is intended to protect the partner who occupies the jointly owned property as their sole residence and lacks the financial means to secure suitable alternative accommodation.
It says the court may take into account the person's family, social and financial circumstances when determining whether continued joint ownership is justified and how long it should last.
The purpose is to give the affected resident time to arrange their affairs without permanently depriving the other co-owners of their legal right to seek partition.
The memorandum also stresses that the two statutory conditions are essential safeguards. Continued joint ownership is not intended to become a means of obstructing other partners or indefinitely postponing the resolution of a property dispute.
Buyout mechanism seeks to preserve homes and ensure fair compensation
The explanatory memorandum describes Clause 4 as another measure designed to balance competing property interests.
On one side is the right of a co-owner seeking partition to exit the joint ownership and receive the fair value of their share. On the other is the interest of the remaining partners in retaining their residential property.
The new mechanism allows the latter to acquire the departing partner's share through a court-supervised valuation and payment process.
The memorandum explains that requiring deposits within a specified period is intended to establish the seriousness of the purchase requests and prevent the procedure from being used to prolong disputes.
The rules governing multiple claimants are also intended to prevent one partner's failure to pay from automatically frustrating the purchase requests of the others or unnecessarily disrupting the proceedings.
Under the amended law, therefore, eligible residents may seek temporary continuation of joint ownership when losing their sole home would cause serious housing difficulties, while other co-owners may seek to purchase the departing partner's share at a court-assessed value.
The amendment introduces a more specific legal framework for residential partition disputes, seeking to protect housing stability while maintaining the rights of property owners under Kuwait's Civil Code
