Provisional measures in international commerical arbitration.

Abstract

Interim protection of rights (through provisional, including protective, measures) is as important as the final protection of those rights. This thesis examines several problems and uncertainties surrounding provisional measures in international commercial arbitration. Those problems and uncertainties influence the effectiveness of arbitration; thus, they constitute a threat to the future of arbitration. The thesis aims to identify, analyse, and offer solutions to those problems and uncertainties. The thesis initially examines the roots and evolution of the concepts of arbitral powers to grant provisional measures and court assistance to arbitration. This examination highlights the roots of the problems and uncertainties and demonstrates how the approach towards provisional measures shifted, in due course of time, from judicial authorities' exclusive power to arbitrators' power to grant those measures and how the courts' role regarding interim protection has evolved into assistance. It further deals with the forum to seek provisional measures mainly to demonstrate that today an arbitrator or another party-determined authority is and should be the natural judge regarding interim protection of rights and that the courts' assistance should be restricted to ensure the effectiveness of arbitration. It, in addition, investigates complementary mechanisms to arbitration for providing interim protection in order to show that such mechanisms enhance the effectiveness of arbitration for a period prior to the appointment of an arbitrator. The thesis also endeavours to establish the standards of procedure and principles in regard of arbitral provisional measures, for instance, form, requirements and types of arbitral provisional measures. The establishment of these standards and principles makes arbitration a more consistent and predictable dispute resolution mechanism. It thus boosts the effectiveness of arbitration. It finally discusses the enforcement of arbitral provisional measures to show that some of these measures are effective without any coercion and that some others, however, necessitate the use of coercive powers, which are lent by judicial authorities.