Not every dispute has to end in a courtroom. The Saudi Ministry of Justice offers a route parallel to litigation: settlement via the Taradhi platform, and Najiz may direct a user there when a settlement request service is used. As part of the Najiz guides on Hala Law, this page presents what the official sources say about the settlement request and its resulting document, and the factors commonly weighed when comparing the two routes: time, cost, and the nature of the dispute. The presentation here is informational and neutral — it does not favor one route over the other, because the assessment in each case depends on its facts.

What is Taradhi, and what is a settlement document worth?

Taradhi is a Ministry of Justice platform through which settlement requests are submitted. The key point that distinguishes this route: settlement documents issued through Taradhi are treated as enforceable instruments, and on breach they can be taken to the enforcement judiciary. The documented agreement is not a toothless understanding but an enforceable document; a party holding an enforceable settlement document proceeds on breach via an enforcement request, not a new statement of claim.

Steps to submit a settlement request via Taradhi

According to the official service description, the request follows this path:

  1. Log in via National Single Sign-On (Nafath).
  2. Choose the settlement request service.
  3. Select the classification that fits the dispute.
  4. Enter the request details.

Najiz can also direct a user to Taradhi when a settlement request service is used from within the platform.

The interface steps above reflect the last verification on 26 June 2026, and labels may change with platform updates.

Factors when comparing settlement and court

There is no single answer that fits everyone. The table below presents the factors as they appear in the source material, framed neutrally:

| Factor | What is noted about the settlement route | What is noted about the litigation route | | --- | --- | --- | | Relationship between the parties | Settlement is often raised where the relationship is ongoing: partner, supplier, relative, employee, client | Litigation is an adversarial process that may affect the relationship | | Nature of the demand | Suits demands open to negotiation: payment in installments, delivery, an apology, adjusting an obligation | The output is a court judgment, not a negotiated formula | | Time and cost | Raised where time and cost weigh more than obtaining a full judgment | Litigation can be a longer path | | Evidence | The strength of available evidence is among the factors mentioned in the comparison | A case is decided on the facts and documents submitted | | Outcome of the route | An enforceable settlement document if agreement is reached | A binding court judgment | | Need for urgent measures | Settlement alone does not provide an urgent measure | The judicial route is where urgent requests are made |

When is settlement alone not enough?

The source material lists situations where the settlement route alone does not suffice:

  • The other party refuses to attend or negotiate.
  • An objection deadline, limitation period, or statutory time limit is approaching.
  • An urgent measure is needed.
  • There is a risk of funds being moved away or documents being concealed.
  • A court judgment is needed, not merely an agreement.
  • The other party has breached previous agreements.

Conversely, the same material lists circumstances where settlement is a seriously considered option: an ongoing relationship worth preserving, a demand open to negotiation, the wish for an enforceable document if agreement is reached, and a family or commercial matter that can be contained without escalation.

If the route is court

If the assessment of a matter points to litigation, the filing journey starts with a statement of claim via Najiz: choosing the classification, party details, facts and requests, and attachments. That path is covered step by step in Filing a case on Najiz.

When do you need a licensed lawyer?

The information here is a general framework, not an assessment of any specific case, and not a recommendation of one route over another. A matter moves closer to needing a licensed professional when:

  • An objection deadline, limitation period, or statutory time limit is approaching — calculating periods and the effect of each step on them is a precise matter.
  • The situation calls for an urgent measure, or there is a risk to funds or documents.
  • The dispute is intertwined with prior contracts, judgments, or instruments whose effect varies with their wording.
  • Signing a settlement document with enforceable effect is on the table, and its obligations should be understood before approval.

In these situations, judging the more suitable route — settlement or litigation — remains a question of facts, documents, and deadlines, not a single general rule.