Urgent interim relief

In many instances, speedy dispute resolution will be of utmost importance for parties. If a dispute is not resolved promptly it may threaten a party’s solvency or ability to conduct ‘business as usual’.

In response to this need, a number of overseas arbitral institutions have introduced the concept of an ‘emergency arbitrator’. Under those procedures, at the request of a party an emergency arbitrator is appointed to determine applications for urgent interim relief before the arbitral tribunal is constituted. Once the application is dealt with, the ‘emergency arbitrator becomes functus.
A bronze statue of Lady Justice is shown, featuring a blindfolded woman holding balanced scales in her right hand. The figure symbolizes impartiality and fairness in the judicial system. The background is blurred, drawing focus to the detailed sculpture.

NZDRC and NZIAC have responded to the demand for urgency in a different, and we would say, a more practical and certain way. The 2018 Rules provide for the urgent appointment of an arbitrator to deal with applications for Urgent Interim Relief before the arbitral tribunal has been constituted in the ordinary course under the Rules. Under this procedure – at the request of a party – NZDRC or NZIAC will appoint an arbitrator from a specialist panel to determine the application. The arbitrator must endeavour to make any interim order or award within five working days of appointment. However, unlike the rules of other institutions, the same arbitrator (unless otherwise agreed by the parties) will continue to act as either sole or Presiding Arbitrator for the remainder of the arbitration. 

This process strikes a balance between meeting demands of urgency and ensuring that time and efficiency is not needlessly wasted through a change of arbitrator. As with all other forms of interim relief, any award or order made in respect of an application for Urgent Interim Relief may be modified, suspended, or cancelled by the Arbitral Tribunal at a later time. However, after an application for Urgent Interim Relief has been determined, the arbitrator who has been appointed for that purpose may be removed by agreement of the parties thus preserving the parties’ inherent right to choose their arbitrator.

NZDRC and NZIAC have established a specialist panel for the purposes of making expedited appointments in cases involving applications for Urgent Interim Relief. The panel is comprised largely of former members of the judiciary in order to instil confidence in the process. 

A bronze balance scale and a wooden gavel are placed on a wooden surface. Two closed black binders are situated in the background. The scene suggests a legal or judicial context.

For domestic arbitrations, and for parties who choose to arbitrate on an ad hoc basis under the Arbitration Act 1996, NZDRC’s appointment process is designed to be efficient allowing for urgent appointments to be made within 24 hours, again providing parties and their counsel with a time efficient option to ensure that those parties are able to access a prompt and professional arbitration service at all times. 

Other resources you might like

If you found this article helpful and are interested in learning more, there is a wealth of other resources available on our website. We have a wide array of articles and guides on a variety of topics, each designed to provide you with a deeper understanding of the subject matter. We encourage you to explore these resources and deepen your knowledge.

Three people in business attire gathered around a table. Two are shaking hands while standing, and the third person, holding a laptop, stands nearby. A smartphone, coffee cup, and a rectangular planter are visible on the white conference table.

Singapore High Court compels party to arbitration to engage in mediation

In the first case of its kind in Singapore, the High Court (Court) has ordered specific performance compelling a party already involved in arbitral proceedings to attend mediation. With no previous caselaw in Singapore ordering performance of mediation as a contractual obligation, Maxx Engineering Works Pte Ltd v PQ Builders Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 71 will be useful precedent for future disputes involving tiered dispute resolution clauses.
Six hands of varying skin tones are gripping each other's wrists, forming a circle. The background is a patch of green grass. Each person is wearing a gold wedding band on their ring finger.

The Trusts Act 2019: keeping it in the family

No-one likes to have their dirty laundry aired in public. Sadly, it has been all too common for parties in family trust and estate disputes, to find their private family affairs made public and become the topic of law journal articles and gossip at parties. The Trusts Act 2019 (Act) has, hopefully, helped put an end to that.

The Act contains provision for the private resolution of disputes through mediation and arbitration (or other non-juridical dispute resolution processes) where the matter would otherwise be headed for the courts. It is a further acknowledgement by Parliament that the court system is not the only, and may not be the most suitable, way for parties to resolve problems.

When reviewing the law of trusts, the Law Commission[1] compared the benefits of private dispute resolution with a court hearing. It said these included lower costs, quicker resolution, achieving finality, maintaining confidentiality and privacy, and being less adversarial. The last is possibly the most important when it comes to maintaining relationships. Given the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the courts’ caseloads, quicker resolution is also a significant benefit.
Open office with wooden desks, computer monitors, and various office supplies. A person works at a desk in the background. The space is decorated with plants and has large windows allowing natural light to fill the room.

When can an arbitrator voluntarily resign and what are the implications for the arbitration?

Circumstances can arise when an arbitrator in a domestic arbitration needs to voluntarily resign their appointment. But what is the status of the arbitration if this occurs? Does the court have jurisdiction to step in? This article looks at a recent Canadian decision which addresses these questions and provides guidance on the factors an arbitrator should consider before voluntarily resigning.

Get in touch

Contact our team today to see how we can help

Contact us

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.