What is an interim receiver? The court may, if it is shown to be necessary for the protection of the debtor’s property, at any time after the presentation of a creditors' bankruptcy petition and before the making of a bankruptcy order, appoint an interim receiver of the debtor’s property under section 286 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). The relevant property for these purposes includes all of the debtor’s property, whether or not it would form part of their bankruptcy estate. The appointment of an interim receiver is therefore one of the emergency measures available under personal insolvency law to prevent the depletion of the estate. It is analogous to the appointment of a provisional liquidator in corporate insolvency. In some cases, the circumstances may require actively interventionist steps to protect the debtor’s property before the making of a bankruptcy order. For further reading on provisional liquidators, see Practice Note: What are provisional liquidators, when are they appointed, and why? Prior to 6 April 2017, IA 1986, s 286(1) specified that the court may appoint the

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: This case involved a series of unsuccessful objections raised by the sole beneficiary of an estate considered likely to be insolvent to the appointment of interim receivers pursuant to section 286 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). Ultimately it was held that the appointment of an interim receiver was necessary for the protection of the deceased debtor’s property, and that the exercise of the court’s discretion favoured an appointment, this being the course of action that would likely cause the least irremediable prejudice to the estate and those interested in it. Written by Imogen Beltrami, barrister at South Square.

Local Government analysis: This was a determination of three applications for interim relief made by the claimant (UYR, a putative 15-year-old child) in the preliminary stage of his dispute against an age decision by Derby City Council (the defendant). The claimant sought orders: (a) granting him anonymity (b) dispensing of the need for a litigation friend and (c) directing that Derby CC (as opposed to Manchester City Council, where the claimant was residing at the time of the application) accommodate him in accordance with its statutory obligations under the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) pending the outcome of the age dispute. Written by Basmah Sahib, solicitor at Bindmans LLP.

In certain circumstances, an interim remedy is available to an employee claiming unfair dismissal before the final hearing of their claim and before any finding of unfair dismissal has been made. When interim relief is available Interim relief is only available where an employee has brought a claim for unfair dismissal and alleges that their dismissal was for one of a number of specified automatically unfair reasons, including: • where the employee: ◦ having been designated by the employer to carry out health and safety duties, carried out those duties, or ◦ being a health and safety representative or member of a safety committee, carried out the functions of that role (see Practice Note: Health and safety—employer consultation and employee representatives) • where the employee was dismissed for performing functions as an employee representative or a candidate to be such a representative under the working time legislation (see Practice Note: Remedies for breach of working time rights) • where dismissal was for performing functions as the trustee of an occupational pension scheme (see Practice Note:

Local Government analysis: The case arose out of a difficult and tragic set of circumstances. The claimant SK lived in temporary accommodation in Maidenhead provided by the defendant, pursuant to the main housing duty under section 193(2) of the Housing Act 1996 (HA 1996). One of SK’s daughters HZ was an in-patient at a hospital in London and it was thought that she was likely to die in the coming weeks or months. SK said that she was experiencing significant challenges due to the distance of the hospital from her current accommodation. She was concerned that HZ might deteriorate suddenly one night and she would not be able to get to the hospital before her daughter died. SK had obtained an interim order on the papers requiring the defendant to provide accommodation within approximately 20 minutes total travel distance from the hospital. The defendant successfully applied to set aside the interim order. Written by Ian Peacock, barrister at 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square.

Public law analysis: The Court of Appeal has given guidance on the correct procedure for challenging a refusal of interim relief applications in judicial review proceedings where the application was determined on the papers: there is a right to oral renewal unless both parties have consented to a paper determination. The judgment also demonstrates that there may be some uncertainty about the correct test for interim relief. Written by Nick Bano, barrister, at Garden Court Chambers

Introduction Interim reliefs in aid of arbitration are readily available to parties in Nigerian arbitration proceedings either as—(i) interim reliefs obtained from the arbitral tribunal, or (ii) interim reliefs obtained from the Nigerian courts. The right to obtain interim relief has been preserved and expanded in the new Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023 (AMA). Interim reliefs in pre-2023 arbitral proceedings The old arbitration law, the Arbitration and Conciliation 1998 (ACA) empowered an arbitral tribunal to order interim measures of protection (Section 13 of the ACA). Article 26 Rules (1) and (2) of the Arbitration Rules (the ‘Rules’), First Schedule to the ACA, also provided that the tribunal could provide interim measures of protection, including ‘measures for the conservation of the goods forming the subject-matter of the dispute’ in the form of an interim award. Although the ACA did not expressly empower the courts to make interim orders such as injunctions pending arbitration,

Akin to other civil law jurisdictions, especially those located in the Middle East, interim remedies are generally less readily available than in common law jurisdictions such as England and Wales or the United States. For arbitrations seated in the Sultanate of Oman (‘Oman’), the Oman Arbitration Act (Royal Decree No. 47 of 1997, as amended), which came into force on 28 June 1997 and was amended in 2007, acts as the lex arbitri. The Oman Arbitration Act is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law. The Oman Arbitration Act is supplemented by the Civil Procedure Law (Royal Decree No. 29 of 2002) and Oman’s adoption of the New York Convention (Royal Decree No. 36 of 1998). Significant headway has been made in Oman in recent years with the introduction of the Oman Commercial Arbitration Centre (‘OAC’) in 2018 (established under Royal Decree No. 26 of 2018) and the issuance of its Arbitration Rules in 2020 (OAC Decision No. 8 of 2020). The Oman Arbitration Act grants arbitral tribunals with the power to grant interim remedies

Interim remedies and arbitration in the UAE Interim remedies in the UAE are generally less readily available than in, for example, England and Wales or the United States. Injunctions and other common forms of interim relief are not recognised in local UAE courts, with limited exceptions. In contrast, the courts of the Dubai International Finance Centre (DIFC) apply common law principals and are therefore more willing to order interim relief and have jurisdiction to issue a wider variety of orders. The tests applied by the DIFC courts when determining whether to grant an injunction should be familiar to lawyers from a common law background. While this may provide comfort to contracting parties who opt for a DIFC courts jurisdiction clause, an interim order from the DIFC courts will be immediately enforceable only against assets, persons, or objects located within the DIFC special economic zone. A claimant may subsequently find it difficult to enforce this interim order against onshore assets through the UAE courts,

The importance of interim measures A party to an international commercial arbitration may wish to obtain interim protection to enforce the status quo or otherwise protect its position. This protection may be necessary at any stage of the arbitral process. While it is a general principle of international arbitration that parties must refrain from any act which might have a prejudicial effect on the execution of the ultimate award or from any acts which might aggravate or extend the dispute, this is small comfort to an applicant faced with a respondent who may be intent on taking steps before, after or during an arbitration ultimately to the applicant’s detriment. It is for this reason that the power of the court and arbitrators to grant interim protective measures in aid of arbitration is of crucial importance. The British Virgin Islands (BVI) Arbitration Act 2013 (the BVI Act) provides a clear regime for the grant of interim measures permitting

This Practice Note discusses the interim remedies available in French courts in support of arbitration proceedings. For guidance on interim remedies available from arbitral tribunals in France, see Practice Note: Interim remedies granted by arbitral tribunals seated in France. Powers of the French courts to grant interim remedies in support of arbitration proceedings Article 1449, paragraph 1 of the French Code of Civil Procedure FCCP provides that the presence of an arbitration agreement does not prevent a party, insofar as the arbitral tribunal has not been constituted, from applying to a French court in order to obtain a measure relating to the taking of evidence (mesure d’instruction) or a provisional or conservatory measure. This provision reflects well-established case law (French Cour de Cassation, Third Civil Chamber, 20 December 1982, No 81-15.746; French Cour de Cassation, Second Civil Chamber, 7 March 2002, No 00-11.526; French Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 6 December 2005,

This Practice Note discusses the interim remedies available to arbitral tribunals seated in France. For guidance on interim remedies available from French courts in support of arbitration proceedings, see Practice Note: Interim remedies granted by French courts in support of arbitration proceedings. Power of arbitral tribunals seated in France to grant interim remedies The power of arbitral tribunals seated in France to grant interim remedies is expressly provided for in article 1468, paragraph 1 of the French Code of Civil Procedure (FCCP): ‘The arbitral tribunal may order the parties, under the conditions it determines and, if necessary, under penalty of a fine, any conservatory or provisional measure it deems appropriate.’ According to this provision, an arbitral tribunal may (i) order any interim remedy it deems appropriate, (ii) set the conditions to apply the interim remedy and (iii) subject, if necessary, the interim remedy to a penalty, to ensure the efficiency of this remedy. However, article