Originally from American Review of International Arbitration - ARIA

Preview Page

I. INTRODUCTION
Most modern arbitration laws and institutional rules now explicitly allow for
interim relief by arbitral tribunals. The traditional hostility towards arbitral interim
relief has largely been abandoned and the national arbitration laws either directly
confer the required powers on the tribunal or entitle the parties to do so. The
former approach can, for example, be found in the UNCITRAL Model Law1
(as amended in 2006) where Article 17(1) provides:
Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral tribunal may, at the request of
a party, grant interim measures.2
Today, some national laws and several arbitration rules even go as far as to
allow for interim relief to be granted ex parte.3 Irrespective of this there are two
typical weaknesses which still limit the use of arbitral interim relief in practice.
The first weakness concerns the availability of interim relief at the preformation
stage. Unlike state courts, arbitral tribunals are in general appointed for
particular disputes. Consequently, during the weeks and months before the
tribunal has been constituted there may not be any arbitral authority available on
short notice when interim relief is needed. Numerous arbitration institutions such