Emergency Arbitrator Proceedings in Turkey: Requirements, Procedure and Enforcement

Emergency arbitrator proceedings in Turkey provide parties with a rapid method of obtaining urgent interim relief before the sole arbitrator or ordinary arbitral tribunal has been constituted.

The mechanism can be particularly important where waiting for the ordinary tribunal would expose a party to irreparable or commercially serious harm. The opposing party may be preparing to transfer shares, dispose of assets, call a bank guarantee, disclose trade secrets, terminate a strategically important contract, remove equipment from a project site or destroy relevant evidence.

A traditional arbitration may require time for the request for arbitration, the response, party nominations, institutional appointments and arbitrator conflict checks. By the time the tribunal receives the case file, the commercial position may already have changed irreversibly.

Emergency arbitration is intended to close this procedural gap.

Under the Istanbul Arbitration Centre Emergency Arbitrator Rules, a party may apply for the appointment of an emergency arbitrator before the case file is transmitted to the sole arbitrator or arbitral tribunal. ISTAC states that the emergency arbitrator is appointed within two working days and must ordinarily render a decision within seven days after receiving the file.

The emergency arbitrator may grant appropriate interim measures and require the applicant to provide security. The decision is written, reasoned and binding on the parties. However, it remains temporary: the emergency arbitrator may modify it before the ordinary tribunal receives the file, and the subsequently constituted tribunal is not bound by the decision and may modify or terminate it.

These characteristics make emergency arbitration fast and commercially valuable but create important enforcement questions. A binding emergency decision does not necessarily have the same legal status as a final arbitral award. Where relief must bind a Turkish bank, registry, enforcement office or third party, judicial assistance will generally remain necessary.

This article explains the scope, application requirements, procedural timetable, standards for relief, costs, relationship with Turkish courts and enforcement risks associated with emergency arbitrator proceedings in Turkey.

What Is an Emergency Arbitrator?

An emergency arbitrator is a neutral decision-maker appointed before the ordinary arbitral tribunal has been constituted.

The emergency arbitrator’s function is limited to urgent interim or conservatory relief. The emergency arbitrator does not conduct the full arbitration and does not finally determine the complete merits of the parties’ dispute.

The emergency arbitrator may be asked to preserve the effectiveness of the future arbitration by ordering measures such as:

• Preservation of assets;
• Maintenance of the contractual status quo;
• Protection of confidential information;
• Preservation of documents or physical evidence;
• Suspension of a disputed contractual action;
• Prevention of a share transfer;
• Deposit of funds into escrow;
• Continued access to systems, premises or project records;
• Security for a claim;
• Temporary performance of an essential obligation.

The precise relief depends on the arbitration agreement, applicable institutional rules, law of the seat, urgency of the case and limits of arbitral authority.

Emergency arbitration should be distinguished from expedited or fast-track arbitration. Fast-track arbitration accelerates the resolution of the merits and produces a final award. Emergency arbitration provides temporary protection until the ordinary tribunal can assume responsibility for the case.

Legal Basis of Emergency Arbitration in Turkey

International Arbitration Law No. 4686 regulates international arbitrations connected with Turkey, including arbitration agreements, tribunal powers, interim measures, procedure and judicial assistance.

The statute does not create a separate statutory office called an “emergency arbitrator.” The emergency arbitrator’s authority instead arises from the parties’ arbitration agreement and the institutional rules incorporated into that agreement.

Where parties agree to arbitration under the ISTAC Arbitration Rules, the Emergency Arbitrator Rules apply unless the parties exclude them in writing. ISTAC’s official model-clause guidance expressly identifies exclusion of the Emergency Arbitrator Rules as an optional addition, confirming that the mechanism is ordinarily included unless the parties opt out.

This structure reflects party autonomy. By selecting ISTAC arbitration without excluding emergency arbitration, the parties agree that an emergency arbitrator may exercise the powers established by the relevant rules.

The mechanism cannot, however, override mandatory limits under Turkish arbitration and procedural law.

When Do the ISTAC Emergency Arbitrator Rules Apply?

The ISTAC Emergency Arbitrator Rules apply to applications made before the case file is transmitted to the sole arbitrator or arbitral tribunal.

Once the ordinary tribunal has received the file, the emergency arbitrator mechanism is no longer available. Interim relief must then be requested from the constituted tribunal or an appropriate court.

The Rules apply to:

• Signatories to the arbitration agreement relied upon in the application;
• Successors of those signatories.

The applicant must therefore establish a prima facie basis showing that both the applicant and respondent are bound by the arbitration agreement and the incorporated emergency procedure.

A parent company, subsidiary, shareholder, director, guarantor or beneficial owner is not automatically bound merely because it has a commercial relationship with a signatory. Consent to arbitration and emergency proceedings must be established separately.

Can the Parties Exclude Emergency Arbitration?

Yes.

The ISTAC Emergency Arbitrator Rules do not apply where the parties have agreed in writing to exclude them. ISTAC’s model-clause guidance suggests the following optional addition:

“The Emergency Arbitrator Rules shall not apply.”

Parties may exclude emergency arbitration where they prefer exclusive reliance on courts or consider emergency proceedings unnecessary for their transaction.

Exclusion should be considered carefully.

Transactions that may require urgent protection include:

• Share purchase agreements;
• Shareholders’ agreements;
• Joint ventures;
• Construction contracts;
• Energy projects;
• Technology licences;
• Distribution agreements;
• Banking transactions;
• International sales;
• Confidentiality and non-compete arrangements.

A party that excludes emergency arbitration may still seek court relief where permitted, but it loses the opportunity to obtain a rapid decision from an arbitrator selected within the agreed institutional framework.

Must the Main Arbitration Be Commenced First?

An applicant is not required to submit a request for arbitration or statement of claim before applying for an emergency arbitrator.

The emergency application may therefore be filed before the main arbitration formally begins. This allows the applicant to act immediately without completing the full merits submission first.

However, the applicant must commence the ordinary arbitration shortly afterward.

Under the ISTAC Emergency Arbitrator Rules, the emergency arbitrator will be discharged if the applicant does not submit a request for arbitration or statement of claim within 15 days after the Secretariat receives the emergency application.

Emergency proceedings are therefore ancillary to an actual or imminent arbitration. They cannot be used as an independent dispute-resolution process disconnected from a substantive claim.

Application Requirements

The emergency application must provide sufficient information for the institution, emergency arbitrator and respondent to understand the parties, arbitration agreement, dispute, urgency and requested relief.

Under the ISTAC Rules, the application must include:

• Full names, titles and contact details of the parties and their representatives;
• An explanation of the dispute to be resolved through arbitration;
• Reasons supporting the requested interim measure;
• Relevant agreements;
• A copy of the arbitration agreement;
• Necessary supporting information and documents;
• A precise description of the relief requested;
• Statements concerning the seat, arbitration language and applicable law;
• Copies of any request for arbitration or pleadings already submitted;
• Proof of payment of the emergency arbitration costs.

The application should not merely state that the matter is urgent. It should explain:

• What is expected to happen;
• When it is expected to happen;
• Why the harm cannot be repaired adequately later;
• How the requested measure will prevent or reduce the harm;
• Why the measure is proportionate;
• Why the claim has a reasonable legal and factual basis.

A weak or vague application may fail even where the underlying merits claim is strong.

Language of the Application

The application must be made in the arbitration language selected by the parties.

Where no language has been selected, the application must be submitted in the language of the arbitration agreement. If the arbitration agreement is written in multiple languages, one of those languages may be used.

Applicants should consider whether supporting documents require translation.

The emergency arbitrator has only a short period to decide the application. Submitting critical documents in a language the arbitrator cannot use effectively may weaken the case or create avoidable delay.

Payment of Costs

Proof of payment must accompany the application. Failure to provide it results in dismissal of the emergency application by the Secretariat.

The current Emergency Arbitrator Rules document displayed by ISTAC states an emergency arbitrator fee of TRY 60,000 and an administrative cost of TRY 15,000. Because fee schedules may be revised, applicants should verify the amounts directly from ISTAC immediately before filing.

The emergency arbitrator determines the costs of the proceedings and decides which party must bear them or in what proportion they should be allocated. The subsequently constituted tribunal may modify the emergency arbitrator’s costs decision upon a party’s request.

The parties’ legal, expert, translation and technical expenses may also be significant, especially where an urgent application requires immediate preparation of financial or technical evidence.

Appointment of the Emergency Arbitrator

The President of the ISTAC Board of Arbitration appoints the emergency arbitrator within two working days after the Secretariat receives the application.

The emergency arbitrator must be independent and impartial throughout the appointment.

Upon accepting the mandate, the arbitrator must submit a statement of impartiality and independence and undertake to devote sufficient time to the proceeding.

The requirement of availability is particularly important because the decision must ordinarily be rendered within seven days after transmission of the file.

An arbitrator who lacks immediate availability would undermine the purpose of emergency proceedings.

Can the Emergency Arbitrator Serve on the Ordinary Tribunal?

The emergency arbitrator may not ordinarily serve as an arbitrator in the subsequent merits arbitration concerning the same dispute.

The parties may agree otherwise, but that agreement must be made after the emergency arbitrator has rendered the decision.

This rule reduces concerns that the emergency arbitrator’s preliminary views may affect the final merits determination.

Emergency proceedings are conducted rapidly and on a limited record. The ordinary tribunal should normally approach the full dispute independently after complete submissions and evidence have been presented.

Challenge of the Emergency Arbitrator

A party seeking to challenge the emergency arbitrator must submit its request to the Secretariat within three days after notification of the appointment.

If the facts giving rise to the challenge become known later, the three-day period begins when the challenging party becomes aware of those facts.

Potential grounds may include:

• A relationship with one of the parties;
• A relationship with counsel;
• A financial or professional interest in the outcome;
• Prior involvement in the dispute;
• Conduct creating justified doubts about impartiality;
• Failure to satisfy agreed qualifications.

The short challenge period reflects the urgent nature of the procedure. Parties should therefore conduct conflict checks immediately after receiving notice of appointment.

Seat of the Emergency Proceedings

Where the parties have selected an arbitral seat, that place is treated as the place of the emergency interim-measure proceedings.

If no seat has been agreed, Istanbul is the default place of the emergency proceedings. The emergency arbitrator may nevertheless conduct meetings at any location considered appropriate.

The legal seat should not be confused with the physical location of a meeting or online hearing.

The seat may influence:

• The procedural law;
• Judicial support;
• Supervisory jurisdiction;
• Classification of the emergency decision;
• Enforcement analysis.

Parties should therefore identify the seat expressly in their arbitration clause.

Procedural Timetable

After receiving the file, the emergency arbitrator must consult the parties and establish a procedural timetable within two days at the latest.

The timetable may provide for:

• A short response from the respondent;
• A reply from the applicant;
• Submission of specified documents;
• A remote procedural meeting;
• A short evidentiary hearing;
• Written submissions on jurisdiction;
• Security-related submissions.

The emergency arbitrator has broad flexibility to conduct the proceedings in a manner appropriate to the nature and urgency of the application.

Unless a hearing is considered necessary, the arbitrator may decide the application solely on the documents. The arbitrator may request any additional information or documents considered necessary.

Right to Be Heard

The emergency arbitrator must conduct the proceedings fairly and impartially and must respect each party’s right to be heard.

The ISTAC emergency procedure is therefore not designed as a purely ex parte process in which the respondent remains unaware of the application.

The Secretariat notifies the respondent, provides the application and annexes and transmits the file to the emergency arbitrator.

Where surprise is essential—for example, where prior notice may cause immediate dissipation of assets—a Turkish court application may be strategically more appropriate, depending on the requirements of Turkish procedural law.

This is a practical inference from the notice and hearing requirements of the ISTAC Rules and the continued availability of court protection under Turkish law.

Jurisdiction of the Emergency Arbitrator

The emergency arbitrator decides whether the application is admissible and whether the arbitrator has jurisdiction to grant the requested relief.

The jurisdictional assessment may involve:

• Existence of a written arbitration agreement;
• Incorporation of the ISTAC Rules;
• Whether emergency arbitration was excluded;
• Whether the applicant and respondent are bound;
• Whether the dispute falls within the clause;
• Whether the file has already been transmitted to the ordinary tribunal;
• Whether the requested measure concerns an arbitrable matter.

At this stage, the emergency arbitrator is unlikely to conduct the same comprehensive jurisdictional review that may occur during the full arbitration.

Nevertheless, the applicant must establish a credible prima facie basis for jurisdiction.

Standards for Granting Emergency Relief

The ISTAC Rules authorise the emergency arbitrator to grant interim measures considered appropriate after taking account of the nature and circumstances of the application. They do not set out a rigid list of substantive tests for every case.

A persuasive application should ordinarily address the following considerations.

Prima Facie Merits

The applicant should demonstrate a credible underlying claim. Emergency proceedings are not intended to grant powerful restrictions in support of a plainly unsustainable case.

The applicant is not normally expected to prove the complete merits at this stage. It should nevertheless identify the contractual or legal right requiring protection.

Urgency

The applicant must explain why relief cannot wait until the ordinary tribunal is constituted.

A self-created delay may weaken the assertion of urgency. An applicant that knew of the risk for months but acted only at the last moment should explain the reason.

Risk of Serious or Irreparable Harm

The application should identify the harm likely to occur without immediate protection.

Examples may include:

• Permanent disclosure of trade secrets;
• Disposal of unique property;
• Loss of corporate control;
• Destruction of evidence;
• Termination of an irreplaceable project;
• Dissipation of assets making the final award ineffective.

“Irreparable” does not necessarily mean that no monetary value can ever be calculated. It may also refer to harm that cannot be repaired adequately or practically through a later damages award.

Proportionality

The requested measure should not impose excessive harm compared with the interest it protects.

An order freezing all business operations may be disproportionate where a narrower restriction would preserve the applicant’s rights.

Connection between the Measure and the Arbitration

The requested relief should protect a right or claim within the arbitration agreement.

Emergency arbitration should not be used to regulate unrelated commercial conduct.

Types of Emergency Measures

Depending on the dispute, an emergency arbitrator may be asked to order:

• Preservation of the status quo;
• Prohibition of a share transfer;
• Preservation of evidence;
• Protection of confidential information;
• Deposit of disputed funds into escrow;
• Continued supply of essential goods;
• Temporary continuation of contractual services;
• Suspension of termination;
• Restriction on disposing of specified assets;
• Access to company books or project records;
• Security for the claim or costs.

The arbitrator must consider whether the requested order can operate effectively between the parties.

Relief requiring action by a third-party bank, public registry or enforcement office creates additional difficulties because arbitral authority is based on consent.

Security

The emergency arbitrator may require the applicant to provide appropriate security as a condition of granting relief.

Security protects the respondent if the measure later proves unjustified and causes loss.

Security may take the form of:

• A bank guarantee;
• Cash deposit;
• Escrow;
• Parent-company guarantee;
• Another acceptable undertaking.

The emergency arbitrator may consider:

• Potential loss caused by the measure;
• Applicant’s financial position;
• Duration of the restriction;
• Strength of the application;
• Difficulty of recovering damages later.

An applicant should address security proactively rather than wait for the issue to arise after the procedural timetable has begun.

The Emergency Decision

The emergency arbitrator must ordinarily render the decision within seven days after receiving the file.

The President of the Board may extend the period upon a reasoned request by the emergency arbitrator or on the President’s own initiative where considered appropriate.

The decision must:

• Be in writing;
• State the date;
• Identify the place of the proceedings;
• Provide reasons;
• Be signed;
• Be notified to the parties and Secretariat.

A reasoned decision improves procedural legitimacy and helps the parties, ordinary tribunal and any supporting court understand the basis and scope of the relief.

Binding Effect

The emergency arbitrator’s decision is binding on the parties, and they undertake to comply without delay.

Binding effect should be distinguished from compulsory enforceability.

Between the parties, failure to comply may constitute:

• Breach of the arbitration agreement;
• Breach of the institutional rules;
• Conduct relevant to costs;
• Evidence of procedural bad faith;
• A basis for requesting relief from the ordinary tribunal;
• A basis for seeking equivalent court protection.

However, the emergency arbitrator does not control state enforcement offices or third parties directly.

Modification and Termination

Before the file is transmitted to the ordinary tribunal, the emergency arbitrator may modify or terminate the decision if the facts or circumstances change and a party makes a reasoned request.

After the ordinary tribunal is constituted, that tribunal is not bound by the emergency decision.

The tribunal may modify or terminate the decision either upon a party’s request or on its own initiative.

This ensures that temporary relief issued on a rapid and limited record does not control the complete proceedings permanently.

When Does the Decision Cease to Be Binding?

Under the ISTAC Rules, an emergency decision ceases to bind the parties where:

• The emergency arbitrator is discharged because the applicant failed to commence the main arbitration within the required period;
• A challenge against the emergency arbitrator is accepted;
• The ordinary arbitral award is rendered, unless the tribunal decides otherwise;
• The arbitration is terminated under the ISTAC Rules.

These termination events demonstrate that emergency relief is provisional rather than a final resolution of the substantive dispute.

Relationship with Turkish Courts

Applying for an emergency arbitrator does not prevent a party from requesting interim protection from a court.

The ISTAC Rules expressly preserve court applications before or after the emergency application and state that such an application does not violate or waive the arbitration agreement.

Article 6 of International Arbitration Law No. 4686 similarly provides that applying to a court for an interim injunction or interim attachment before or during arbitration does not conflict with the arbitration agreement.

Emergency arbitration and court relief are therefore complementary rather than mutually exclusive.

When Is Court Relief More Appropriate?

A Turkish court may be preferable where the relief requires:

• Freezing a Turkish bank account;
• Attachment through enforcement authorities;
• Registration of a restriction over real estate;
• Action by the commercial registry;
• Action by the land registry;
• Delivery or preservation of goods held by a third party;
• Binding a non-signatory;
• A measure supported by direct state coercion;
• Relief without prior notice where legally available.

Turkish International Arbitration Law provides that an arbitral tribunal cannot grant a measure that must be executed by compulsory enforcement bodies, requires performance by another public authority or binds third parties. If a tribunal-ordered measure is not complied with, the opposing party may request assistance from the competent court.

Although Article 6 refers to an arbitral tribunal, the same consent-based limitations are highly relevant to emergency arbitrators.

Court Relief in Foreign-Seated Arbitration

The Turkish statutory provisions concerning court interim protection apply even where the legal seat is outside Turkey.

Article 1 of Law No. 4686 preserves the operation of Articles 5 and 6 in foreign-seated cases. This allows a party to seek Turkish interim protection where assets, evidence or relevant conduct are located in Turkey even though the merits will be arbitrated abroad.

For example, a party to a London-seated arbitration may seek assistance from a Turkish court where the respondent’s bank account or property is in Turkey.

The foreign emergency arbitrator’s decision may support the Turkish application, but the Turkish court will apply the procedural conditions governing its own interim measure.

Is an Emergency Arbitrator Decision Directly Enforceable in Turkey?

Direct enforcement remains legally uncertain.

An ISTAC emergency decision is expressly binding between the parties. However, it is temporary, capable of modification and not binding on the ordinary tribunal. It may also cease to bind when the final award is issued or the arbitration ends.

These features distinguish it from a final or genuine partial arbitral award that conclusively determines a separable claim.

The New York Convention establishes a framework for recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, but it does not expressly establish a comprehensive international regime for temporary emergency measures.

Accordingly, a Turkish court may question whether an emergency decision constitutes an “arbitral award” suitable for ordinary recognition and enforcement.

The more reliable route will often be to request an equivalent Turkish court injunction or attachment under Article 6 of Law No. 4686.

Binding Does Not Always Mean Executable

The distinction between binding effect and executability is essential.

A party may be contractually required to comply with the emergency decision. Non-compliance may have serious consequences in the arbitration.

Nevertheless, compulsory execution against property or third parties requires state authority.

For example, an emergency arbitrator may direct a shareholder not to transfer shares. That order binds the shareholder contractually. It may not automatically bind:

• The target company;
• A third-party purchaser;
• The commercial registry;
• A custodian;
• An enforcement office.

Judicial assistance may be necessary to create external legal effects.

Emergency Decision or Interim Award?

An applicant may argue that a particular emergency decision should be enforced as an arbitral award.

Classification should depend on substance rather than title.

A decision is more likely to resemble an award where it:

• Finally resolves a separable claim;
• Imposes unconditional relief;
• Is not subject to reconsideration;
• Exhausts the arbitrator’s authority over the issue.

An ISTAC emergency decision ordinarily has the opposite characteristics. It is expressly temporary, may be modified or terminated and does not bind the ordinary tribunal.

It should therefore generally be treated as an interim protective decision rather than a final partial award.

Consequences of Non-Compliance

Where a respondent refuses to comply, the applicant may consider:

• Requesting equivalent court relief;
• Informing the ordinary tribunal;
• Seeking modification or strengthening of the measure;
• Requesting adverse costs consequences;
• Claiming damages caused by non-compliance;
• Arguing procedural bad faith;
• Requesting preservation or adverse-inference orders.

The ordinary tribunal may consider the respondent’s conduct when deciding costs and procedural issues, subject to the applicable rules and the parties’ right to be heard.

Non-compliance should be documented carefully through notices, correspondence and evidence of resulting harm.

Emergency Arbitration in Shareholder Disputes

Emergency relief may be especially useful where a shareholder threatens to:

• Transfer shares contrary to contractual restrictions;
• Convene a disputed general assembly;
• Approve a dilutive capital increase;
• Remove directors in breach of voting obligations;
• Dispose of key company assets;
• Disclose confidential business information;
• Implement a related-party transaction.

The applicant must distinguish contractual obligations from corporate or registry effects.

An emergency arbitrator may order a signatory to comply with its contractual commitments. A Turkish court may still be required where the requested measure must bind the company, registry, creditors or shareholders that did not consent to arbitration.

Emergency Arbitration in Construction and Energy Disputes

Construction and energy projects may require immediate relief concerning:

• Performance-bond calls;
• Access to the site;
• Removal of equipment;
• Suspension of work;
• Preservation of project records;
• Continued supply of fuel or electricity;
• Protection of commissioning data;
• Preservation of machinery;
• Confidential technical information.

The applicant should explain how the requested relief affects public safety, continued operations and third-party rights.

A measure that effectively decides the entire dispute or prevents lawful exercise of regulatory authority may be rejected or narrowed.

Emergency Arbitration in International Sales

In an international sales dispute, emergency relief may concern:

• Preservation of perishable goods;
• Prevention of resale;
• Inspection of defective products;
• Release of shipping documents;
• Preservation of samples;
• Storage arrangements;
• Confidential customer information.

Where goods are held by a carrier, warehouse, customs authority or third-party consignee, court relief may be required because those persons are not ordinarily bound by the arbitration agreement.

Evidence for an Emergency Application

The applicant should submit a focused evidentiary record.

Relevant evidence may include:

• The arbitration agreement;
• Principal contract;
• Notices;
• Emails and messages;
• Board resolutions;
• Bank records;
• Share transfer documents;
• Photographs;
• Technical reports;
• Expert statements;
• Evidence of threatened conduct;
• Asset information;
• Evidence of urgency.

The application should avoid overwhelming the emergency arbitrator with an unstructured merits file.

A useful structure is:

1. Contractual right;
2. Threatened or continuing breach;
3. Urgency;
4. Expected harm;
5. Requested measure;
6. Proportionality;
7. Security;
8. Jurisdiction.

Responding to an Emergency Application

The respondent may argue that:

• No valid arbitration agreement exists;
• Emergency arbitration was excluded;
• The respondent is not bound;
• The file has already been transmitted to the ordinary tribunal;
• No genuine urgency exists;
• The applicant delayed;
• The harm is compensable through damages;
• The requested measure is disproportionate;
• The measure would affect third parties;
• The application seeks final relief disguised as interim protection;
• The applicant has not offered adequate security;
• The requested measure would violate mandatory law or public policy.

The respondent should present a practical alternative where appropriate.

For example, instead of a complete prohibition on using funds, the respondent may propose a limited escrow or reporting obligation.

Drafting an Emergency Arbitration Clause

ISTAC emergency arbitration generally applies unless excluded, but the clause should still be drafted with urgent relief in mind.

A sample clause may provide:

“Any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall be finally resolved by arbitration administered by the Istanbul Arbitration Centre in accordance with the ISTAC Arbitration Rules.

The seat of arbitration shall be Istanbul, Türkiye. The language of arbitration shall be English. The tribunal shall consist of three arbitrators.

The ISTAC Emergency Arbitrator Rules shall apply. The emergency arbitrator and the arbitral tribunal may grant interim, conservatory and protective measures, including preservation of assets and evidence, maintenance of the status quo, confidentiality protection, security and temporary performance of contractual obligations.

Nothing in this arbitration agreement shall prevent a party from applying to a competent court for interim injunction, interim attachment, preservation of evidence or another protective measure. Any court application shall not constitute a waiver of the arbitration agreement or emergency arbitrator procedure.”

The clause cannot expand arbitral authority over non-parties or eliminate mandatory court powers.

Practical Checklist for Applicants

Before filing an emergency application, the applicant should confirm:

• A valid written arbitration agreement exists;
• The ISTAC Rules apply;
• Emergency arbitration was not excluded;
• The ordinary tribunal has not received the file;
• The respondent is bound;
• The dispute falls within the arbitration clause;
• Genuine urgency exists;
• The requested measure is proportionate;
• Evidence is available;
• Security can be provided;
• Costs have been paid;
• The application language is correct;
• The main arbitration can be commenced within 15 days;
• Court relief is not more effective;
• Third parties or registries must not be bound directly;
• A Turkish court application should be prepared in parallel;
• The requested order is clear and practically workable.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is an emergency arbitrator?

An emergency arbitrator is a neutral appointed to determine an urgent interim-relief application before the ordinary arbitral tribunal has been constituted.

Do the ISTAC Emergency Arbitrator Rules apply automatically?

They apply where the parties have agreed to ISTAC arbitration unless they have excluded the Emergency Arbitrator Rules in writing.

Must the request for arbitration be filed first?

No. The emergency application may be filed before the request for arbitration or statement of claim. The main arbitration must then be commenced within 15 days after the Secretariat receives the emergency application.

How quickly is the emergency arbitrator appointed?

The President of the ISTAC Board appoints the emergency arbitrator within two working days after receipt of the application.

How quickly is the decision rendered?

The decision must ordinarily be rendered within seven days after the emergency arbitrator receives the file, subject to a possible extension.

Can the proceeding be decided without a hearing?

Yes. Unless the emergency arbitrator considers a hearing necessary, the application may be decided on the documents.

Is the respondent notified?

Yes. The Secretariat sends the application and annexes to the other party, and the emergency arbitrator must respect each party’s right to be heard.

Can the emergency arbitrator require security?

Yes. Appropriate security may be required as a condition of granting the requested interim measure.

Is the decision binding?

Yes. The parties undertake to comply without delay. The decision may later be modified or terminated by the emergency arbitrator or ordinary tribunal.

Is the ordinary tribunal bound by the emergency decision?

No. The tribunal may modify or terminate it upon request or on its own initiative.

Can the same person serve as emergency arbitrator and merits arbitrator?

Ordinarily no. The parties may agree after the emergency decision that the person may also serve in the ordinary arbitration.

Can a party challenge the emergency arbitrator?

Yes. A challenge must generally be submitted within three days after notification of the appointment or discovery of the relevant facts.

Can the applicant also seek relief from a Turkish court?

Yes. Court relief before or after the emergency application does not waive the arbitration agreement or emergency procedure.

Can the emergency arbitrator freeze a Turkish bank account directly?

The emergency arbitrator cannot ordinarily bind a non-party bank or directly use Turkish enforcement authorities. A Turkish court order will generally be required.

Can an emergency decision be enforced under the New York Convention?

Its status is uncertain because emergency decisions are temporary and modifiable and do not bind the ordinary tribunal. Requesting equivalent judicial protection will often be the safer enforcement route.

Does Turkish court assistance remain available in foreign-seated arbitration?

Yes. The Turkish statutory provisions concerning arbitration objections and interim protection also apply where the seat is outside Turkey.

Conclusion

Emergency arbitrator proceedings in Turkey provide an effective mechanism for obtaining urgent interim relief before the ordinary arbitral tribunal has been constituted.

Under the ISTAC framework, the procedure is exceptionally rapid. The emergency arbitrator is appointed within two working days and ordinarily renders a reasoned decision within seven days after receiving the file.

The applicant does not need to file the request for arbitration first, but the main arbitration must be commenced within 15 days after the Secretariat receives the emergency application.

The procedure combines speed with procedural fairness. The respondent is notified, the emergency arbitrator must preserve the right to be heard and the application may be decided on documents unless a hearing is considered necessary.

Emergency relief may preserve assets, evidence, confidential information, contractual performance or corporate rights. The applicant must nevertheless demonstrate genuine urgency, a credible claim, serious potential harm and proportionality.

The emergency decision is binding between the parties but remains provisional. It may be modified or terminated, does not bind the ordinary tribunal and normally ceases to operate when the final award is rendered unless the tribunal decides otherwise.

These characteristics create enforcement limitations.

An emergency arbitrator cannot directly control Turkish enforcement authorities, banks, registries or non-parties. Where coercive or third-party effect is required, Turkish court assistance should be sought under Article 6 of International Arbitration Law No. 4686.

Emergency arbitration and court relief should therefore be viewed as complementary remedies.

Emergency arbitration provides a rapid decision from within the parties’ chosen dispute-resolution framework. Courts provide the sovereign authority required to freeze accounts, bind third parties, register restrictions and compel compliance.

The most effective strategy may involve both mechanisms. The party may request an emergency decision while simultaneously preparing a narrowly tailored Turkish court application.

Contract drafting is equally important. Parties should decide expressly whether emergency arbitration will apply, preserve access to courts and identify the seat, language and institutional rules clearly.

Once a threat emerges, speed is essential. Evidence, fees, translations, security and the ordinary request for arbitration should be prepared immediately.

A well-planned emergency application can prevent irreversible harm and preserve the commercial value of the final arbitral award.

Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Emergency relief depends on the arbitration agreement, institutional rules, seat, urgency, requested measure, identity of affected persons, location of assets and applicable procedural law. Case-specific Turkish legal advice should be obtained before filing an emergency arbitrator or court application.