Interim and emergency measures

Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis

This Overview provides an outline of the interim and emergency measures subtopic covering interim and emergency measures to support arbitration available within England and Wales under the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996). The Overview provides links to the relevant Practice Notes covering freezing injunctions, emergency relief and how to apply to the courts for the emergency relief, and peremptory orders.

Emergency relief in, or in support of, arbitration under the AA 1996 in England and Wales—tribunal or court?

This Practice Note sets out the powers given to the tribunal under AA 1996 to order interim or emergency relief to support an arbitration. The tribunal’s powers are best seen alongside the court’s powers in order for practitioners to choose how best to protect their clients.

For more information, see Practice Note: AA 1996—interim and/or emergency relief—tribunal or court?

Emergency relief in arbitration—applying to the tribunal under

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Arbitration News

England and Wales Court of Appeal ruling on peremptory orders (LLC Eurochem North-West-2 v Techimont SPA & others)

Arbitration analysis: the key issue in this case turned on a question of statutory construction, namely whether pursuant to section 42 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996), the court has the power to enforce a peremptory order of an arbitration tribunal which grants anti-suit relief. The arbitration tribunal had made a series of peremptory orders following the non-compliance by the appellant with its non-peremptory orders. Dismissing the appeal, the Court of Appeal unsurprisingly held that compliance with an order or direction of the tribunal is necessary for the proper and expeditious conduct of the arbitral proceedings, and such an order includes anti-suit relief. On that basis, under AA 1996, s 41, the tribunal had the power to grant the peremptory orders, and the court could make an order requiring a party to comply with those orders of the tribunal. Written by Daniel Jukes, barrister at Wilberforce Chambers.

Hong Kong Court refuses stay in favour of arbitration where settlement agreement disapplies arbitration clause in original contract (Kat Yue Construction v Fai Lee Construction)

Arbitration analysis: In Kat Yue Construction v Fai Lee Construction, the Hong Kong Court of First Instance refused leave to appeal against a decision declining to stay court proceedings in favour of arbitration. The dispute arose from a construction contract which contained an arbitration clause. The parties settled the initial dispute by entering into a Settlement Agreement that expressly provided that the arbitration clause ‘shall not apply’. When further disputes arose under the Settlement Agreement, the defendant applied to stay the proceedings in favour of arbitration, arguing that the plaintiff’s damages were based on the original contract and therefore fell within the arbitration clause. The court refused a stay and subsequently refused leave to appeal. The court held that the Settlement Agreement, rather than the original contract, was the ‘centre of gravity’ of the dispute. Although damages were assessed by reference to the original contract, the plaintiff’s right to relief depended on establishing a breach of the Settlement Agreement—which the court characterised as a ‘condition precedent’ to recovery. The court further noted that requiring arbitration would render the express exclusion clause otiose and lead to ‘fragmentation’ of proceedings. This decision illustrates that where related agreements contain conflicting dispute resolution regimes, the court will adopt the regime governing the agreement at the ‘centre of gravity’ of the dispute. It reinforces the principle that courts will not strain to bring disputes within an arbitration clause where parties have expressly agreed otherwise. Written by Paul Starr, partner, and John Law, associate, at King & Wood Mallesons.

Arbitration weekly highlights—29 January 2026

This week's edition of Arbitration weekly highlights includes: arbitration-related decision from England & Wales, the USA, Hong Kong, updates from CMAC, SCC, ICCA, and LexisNexis Middle East launched a bilingual legal research platform for Saudi Arabia. All this, and more, in our weekly highlights.

Section 69 appeal—court clarifies scope of repudiation compensation (Olam Global Agri Pte Ltd v Holbud Ltd)

Arbitration analysis: This decision concerns Olam Global Agri Pte Ltd’s (Seller or Olam) section 69 appeal under the Arbitration Act 1996 (the ‘Act’) against a Grain and Feed Trade Association (GAFTA) Board of Appeal (BOA) award (BOA Award) in favour of Holbud Ltd (Buyer or ‘Holbud’) arising out of a GAFTA 49 FOB sale contract dated 19 November 2021 (the ‘Contract’). The appeal raised two issues: (a) whether an innocent party must prove its own ability to perform its contractual obligations in order to recover substantial damages where the counterparty has repudiated the contract by wrongly declaring force majeure; and (b) whether Clause 6 of GAFTA 49 (‘Clause 6’) permits a substitute vessel to be nominated at any time before the innocent party accepts that repudiation. In setting aside the BOA Award, the Commercial Court held that a wrongful force majeure notice does not, without more, relieve the Buyer of the need to prove it could have performed its own obligations to recover substantial damages. The court also found that Clause 6 does not permit substitution of a nominated vessel outside the clause’s strict timing requirements. Holbud’s claim for substantial damages therefore failed. The case underscores the corrective function of section 69 of the Act (‘Section 69’) and provides important guidance on the application of the compensatory principle in assessing damages following repudiatory breach. Written by Dr Ademola Bamgbose, solicitor advocate and senior associate at Hogan Lovells, London and Sofie Gowran, trainee solicitor at Hogan Lovells, London.

View Arbitration by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

The seat of the arbitration

The seat of the arbitrationThis Practice Note considers the key concept of the seat of an arbitration, with a particular focus on the law of England and Wales and Northern Ireland (England and English are used as shorthand throughout). Practice Note: Choosing the seat of arbitration may also be of

Arbitration agreements—example domestic arbitration clause (England and Wales)

Arbitration agreements—example domestic arbitration clause (England and Wales)Arbitration clauses and agreements provide for disputes to be dealt with by an appointed arbitral tribunal and can arise in both domestic and international contexts. For more information on arbitration agreements, see the

Institutional arbitration—an introduction to the key features of institutional arbitration

Institutional arbitration—an introduction to the key features of institutional arbitrationWhat is institutional arbitration?An institutional arbitration is one that is administered by an institution agreed upon by the parties and conducted in accordance with that institution’s arbitration rules.

Arbitration agreements—the doctrine of separability (England and Wales)

Arbitration agreements—the doctrine of separability (England and Wales)This Practice Note considers the doctrine of separability under the law of England and Wales (England and English are used as shorthand throughout). This Practice Note should be read in conjunction with Practice Note:
The seat of the arbitration

The seat of the arbitration

The seat of the arbitrationThis Practice Note considers the key concept of the seat of an arbitration, with a particular focus on the law of England and Wales and Northern Ireland (England and English are used as shorthand throughout). Practice Note: Choosing the seat of arbitration may also be of

Arbitration agreements—example domestic arbitration clause (England and Wales)

Arbitration agreements—example domestic arbitration clause (England and Wales)

Arbitration agreements—example domestic arbitration clause (England and Wales)Arbitration clauses and agreements provide for disputes to be dealt with by an appointed arbitral tribunal and can arise in both domestic and international contexts. For more information on arbitration agreements, see the

Institutional arbitration—an introduction to the key features of institutional arbitration

Institutional arbitration—an introduction to the key features of institutional arbitration

Institutional arbitration—an introduction to the key features of institutional arbitrationWhat is institutional arbitration?An institutional arbitration is one that is administered by an institution agreed upon by the parties and conducted in accordance with that institution’s arbitration rules.

Arbitration agreements—the doctrine of separability (England and Wales)

Arbitration agreements—the doctrine of separability (England and Wales)

Arbitration agreements—the doctrine of separability (England and Wales)This Practice Note considers the doctrine of separability under the law of England and Wales (England and English are used as shorthand throughout). This Practice Note should be read in conjunction with Practice Note: