Interim Measures in International Commercial Arbitration: A Discourse in Continued Uncertainty
The paper investigates the problem associated with the issue of interim measures in international arbitration, particularly, the power of arbitral tribunals to grant such measures and to enforce them. After an extensive and detailed analysis of various international arbitration rules, conventions and national systems the research finds that there is a great deal of uncertainty and confusion as to the issues underlying interim measures in international arbitration. In addition, national legislations on arbitration need to be clarified and adjusted to international best practices.
One of the main issues which the paper highlights is the limitation on national court’s power to order interim measures. In several cases, it has been recorded that the availability of emergency arbitrator’s provisions under institutional rules may significantly jeopardize the parties’ existing right to seek court-ordered interim measures, which is not in line with what the arbitral institutions had intended upon providing these expediting provisions. Thus, the paper provides suggestions and recommendations towards more certainty in the treatment of interim measures in international arbitration.
Keywords : Arbitration, Interim Measures, Uncertainty
Born, International Arbitration: Cases and Materials (Second Edition, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2015)
Born, International Commercial Arbitration (Second Edition, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2014)
Savage and Gaillard, Fouchard Gaillard Goldman on International Commercial Arbitration (Kluwer Law International, 1999).
Moses, The Principles and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration (Cambridge University Press, Second Edition, 2012).
Alan Scott Rau, ‘Provisional Relief in Arbitration: How Things Stand in the United States’, Journal of International Arbitration, (Kluwer Law International 2005, Volume 22 Issue 1), P. 27
Chester Brown, ‘The Enforcement of Interim Measures Ordered by Tribunals and Emergency Arbitrators in International Arbitration’, in Albert janvan den Berg 9ed), International Arbitration: The Coming of a New Age?, ICCA Congress Series, Volume 17 (Kluwer Law International, 2013),
Chris Parker & Aaron McDonald, ‘ENGLISH HIGH COURT HAS NO JURISDICTION TO GRANT URGENT RELIEF UNDER ARBITRATION ACT WHERE URGENT RELIEF COULD BE GRANTED BY EXPEDITED TRIBUNAL OR EMERGENCY ARBITRATOR UNDER LCIA RULES’ (2016)
Lee Anna Tucker, ‘Interim Measures under Revised UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules: Comparison to Model Law Reflects both Greater Flexibility and Remaining Uncertainty’ International Commercial Arbitration Brief 1, no. 2 (2011).
Reymond, ‘The Chanel Tunnel case and the law of international arbitration’ (1993) 109 LQR 337, at 341.
Susan Field, ‘Narrowing the powers of the national courts to grant interim measures – A measure too far?’, Kluwer Arbitration Blog, August 27 2015
Treaty Between Sweden and The United States for The Advancement of Peace (1914): The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 10, No. 4, (American Society of International Law; Cambridge University Press)
V.V. (Johnny Veeder, ‘The Need for Cross-border Enforcement of Interim Measures Ordered by a State Court In Support of the International Arbitral Process’, in Albert Jan van den Berg (ed), New Horizons in International Commercial Arbitration and Beyond, ICCA Congress Series, Volum 12 (Kluwer Law International, 2005) P. 242-271