Most arbitrations are won or lost before the first hearing — at the moment assets can still be frozen and evidence preserved. UAE law gives a claimant three routes to urgent protection, and knowing which to use, and when, is often decisive.
Why interim relief decides cases
An award against a respondent who has already moved its money is a trophy, not a remedy. The real contest is frequently the early one: securing assets against which the award can later be enforced, preserving evidence before it disappears, and holding the status quo while the tribunal is assembled. UAE arbitration law provides for all three, through a tribunal, through the courts, and — before either exists — through an emergency arbitrator.
The tribunal’s power: Article 21
Under Article 21 of the Federal Arbitration Law No. 6 of 2018, the arbitral tribunal may order interim or conservatory measures, either at a party’s request or of its own motion. The measures contemplated are exactly those a dispute demands: preserving evidence, maintaining or securing assets or funds against which enforcement may later be sought, and restraining a party from acts that would prejudice the arbitration. Critically, the regime has teeth — a party in whose favour a measure is ordered may take it to the competent court for enforcement under Article 21(4). The tribunal’s powers can be modified or excluded by agreement, so the arbitration rules and the clause matter.
The court’s power: Article 18
The tribunal cannot always act quickly enough — and before it is constituted, it cannot act at all. Article 18 fills the gap: the President of the competent court may order appropriate provisional or precautionary measures, at any time before or during the arbitral proceedings, on the application of a party or at the tribunal’s request. Seeking court-ordered interim relief does not waive the arbitration agreement; the two run in parallel. For urgent asset-freezing and evidence-preservation, the onshore courts — and, for DIFC- and ADGM-seated matters, those free zones’ own courts — remain an indispensable tool.
An award against a respondent who has already moved its money is a trophy, not a remedy.
Before the tribunal exists: the emergency arbitrator
The gap between filing a request for arbitration and constituting a tribunal can run to weeks — time enough for assets to vanish. The modern institutional rules close it. Both the DIAC Rules 2022 and the arbitrateAD Rules 2024 provide an emergency arbitrator mechanism: a single arbitrator appointed on an expedited basis to grant urgent interim relief pending the full tribunal. Where the seat is the DIFC or ADGM, the free zones’ common-law courts are also a well-used forum for urgent injunctive support. The choice between emergency arbitrator and court turns on speed, the need for surprise, and where the assets sit.
Getting the strategy right
Three questions decide the approach: which forum — tribunal, emergency arbitrator or court — can act fast enough and bind the right assets; whether the relief will be enforceable where it matters; and how much notice the respondent should get, given the limits on ex parte relief. These decisions are made under time pressure, but they are best planned for in advance — the party that has mapped its interim-relief strategy before the dispute erupts moves first, and in asset-recovery, moving first is usually moving decisively. Interim relief sits within the wider architecture of seats and supervisory courts described in the seats and frameworks.
Key instruments: Federal Arbitration Law No. 6 of 2018 (Articles 18 and 21); DIAC Arbitration Rules 2022; arbitrateAD Arbitration Rules 2024. General information, not legal advice.