Originally from Dispute Resolution Journal

What should parties expect from the ICDR pre-arbitration emergency relief procedure? Part I of this article examines the requirements of Article 37 of the ICDR International Arbitration Rules and four cases in which a party sought pre-arbitration emergency relief under its provisions.

Part II, which will be published in the next issue of the Dispute Resolution Journal, considers the issue of enforcement of emergency arbitrator decisions in U.S. courts.

On May 1, 2006, the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR)1 introduced a new procedure for the granting of emergency arbitral relief under its International Arbitration Rules (ICDR Rules).2 The procedure enables a party to apply for emergency interim relief before the appointment of an arbitrator or tribunal to adjudicate the merits of the dispute. Instead, the application for emergency relief is considered by an emergency arbitrator appointed by the ICDR for this specific task.

What can the parties to a dispute expect when they use this procedure, which is contained in Article 37 of the ICDR Rules? As with any legal procedure, it is helpful for the practitioner to know the rule in detail and have some idea how it operates in practice. In Part I of this article, we examine each step of Article 37 and discuss four cases in which one party sought emergency relief in order to assess in detail how the procedure has operated. In Part II, which will be published in the next issue of the Dispute Resolution Journal, we consider whether (or to what degree) parties should expect U.S. courts to enforce decisions made by emergency arbitrators.3 We hope to provide practitioners with a road map so they know what to expect of the ICDR emergency arbitrator procedure and of subsequent enforcement proceedings.