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.

Hamilton Bridge
Arbitration

HAL in hot water: Tetchy comments and refusal to attend arbitration boils over in lease dispute

Yi Ming Investment Ltd (YMIL) terminated the lease of Hamilton Accommodation Ltd (HAL) due to alleged contractual breaches at the Ascot Motor Lodge in Hamilton, in the High Court case of Hamilton Accommodation Limited v Yi Ming Investment Limited [2024] NZHC 1619. These breaches included unauthorised alterations to the manager’s unit and using the premises for emergency housing without permission. Once the dispute arose HAL refused to engage in arbitration and the matter ended up in the High Court, with the Court handing down a scathing verdict on HAL’s conduct.
Learn more
A brass scale of justice sits prominently on a glass desk, symbolizing law and fairness. In the background, a person in a suit, partially out of focus, examines documents, indicating that even in this seemingly straightforward setting, the court sees through layers of lipstick and linguistic camouflage.
Arbitration

The importance of certainty in international arbitration agreements

The UK Supreme Court has once again looked at how to determine the law that applies to an international arbitration agreement in the case of Kabab-Ji SAL v Kout Food Group [2021] UKSC 48. An interesting set of facts led the Court to look at an arbitration agreement arising out of arbitral proceedings in Paris that resulted in separate appeals both in England and France over the same set of facts, and how both Courts came to different conclusions, which in the end highlighted the absolute need for certainty when drafting international agreements.
Learn more
Arbitration

When the math matters: NZDRC arbitrator gets rent review right

Rent review disputes might not make headlines, but when they end up in arbitration — and then in the High Court — the details matter. A recent case involving a decision of one of NZDRC’s arbitrators, Catherine Green, is a good reminder of why getting the numbers right is so important.
Learn more

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.