INTERIM MEASURES IN ARBITRATION

Abstract

In the arbitration, just like in civil litigation, it may be necessary before the final merit award is rendered by the arbitral tribunal, the relations between the parties to be temporarily settled. The need for ordering interim measures before or during an arbitration may arise in order to create conditions for maintaining the existing situation untilthe arbitration settlement of the dispute, facilitating the enforcement of the potential condemnatory arbitration award or faster conduct of the arbitration.Due to these advantages of the interimmeasures, the problem of interim measures in the modern arbitration process theory and practice gets more and more important. In the context of this, the questions arise what types of interim measures and under what conditions can be ordered in the arbitration?Who has the authority to order inerim measures: the state court or arbitrator of the arbitration tribunal or arbitrator for emergencies, and etc. Regarding the types of interim measures that can be ordered before or during the arbitration, there are: conservation, temporary, procedural-facilitating, record-keeping and execution-enforcement measures. The conditions for ordering each of these measures are specific and depend on the purpose and function of the interim measure itself. Regarding the dilemma who is auhtorized to order interim measures in the arbitration, it must be emphasized that the older arbitration theory and practice that has been created around state protectionist legal politics accepts the position that only the state court can order inerim measures while the contemporary arbitration theory and practice proves that the arbitrator of the arbitration court (more often) or an emergency arbitrator (less often) should order the imerim measures in the arbitration. It is precisely because of these problems and dilemmas that still baffle the science of the arbitration procedural law the subject of this paper will be the legal regulation of the subject matter of the interim measures in the Macedonian arbitration legislation. For this purpose, an analysis will be made of the positive legal provisions of the Law on Litigation Procedure of the Republic of Macedonia which regulates the domestic arbitration, the Law on International Commercial Arbitration of the Republic of Macedonia, which regulates the international arbitration and the Rules of The Permanent court of Arbitration attached to the Economic Chamber of Republic of Macedonia that apply to resolve arbitration disputes with and without a foreign element and will be analyzed whether they regulate and to what extent they regulate the issue of ordering of inrim measures in the arbitration. This will be done in order to conclude whether there is a need for amendments of the Macedonian Arbitration Legislation in order for the Macedonian arbitration procedural right to be in line with the modern arbitration tendencies for ordering interim measures in the arbitration, primarily the UNCITRAL Model Law.