Interim Measures for Arbitration with a Turkish Seat: Securing Evidence and Assets Before and During Proceedings

By Av. Burak Şahin — Şahin Hukuk

Introduction

Parties to international arbitration may face urgent threats to assets or evidence that cannot wait for the constitution of the tribunal. When the seat of arbitration is in Türkiye, counsel should understand the interplay between arbitral institutions, emergency relief mechanisms and the support available from Turkish state courts. This article provides a practical roadmap for preserving assets and documents before and during arbitration.

Identify available interim relief routes

There are three principal routes for interim relief in the context of arbitration with a Turkish seat:

• Emergency relief from the arbitral tribunal or an emergency arbitrator where the arbitration rules and applicable law permit.
• Provisional measures ordered by the competent Turkish courts in support of arbitration or pending the constitution of the tribunal.
• Protective orders or undertakings negotiated between the parties as a temporary measure.

Emergency arbitrators and institutional options

Many institutional rules provide for emergency arbitrators empowered to grant urgent measures prior to the tribunal’s formation. Where available, the emergency arbitrator can be a swift route, but the cost and enforceability depend on institutional rules and the willingness of domestic courts to recognise such orders. Draft any emergency relief application to demonstrate urgency, irreparable harm and a clear link to the arbitration agreement and seat.

Domestic court assistance: when and how to apply

Turkish courts can provide effective provisional relief—attachments, asset freezes, injunctions and orders to preserve evidence—particularly where tribunal emergency mechanisms are unavailable or inadequate. Practical considerations when applying to national courts:

1. Establish jurisdiction and explain the arbitration seat; confirm that the relief sought is compatible with the arbitration agreement.
2. Adopt a narrow, specific drafting style for relief: identify assets, amounts and precise evidentiary categories to be preserved.
3. Prepare evidence of prima facie rights and immediacy: affidavits, transactional records and forensic indicators of dissipation.
4. Be prepared to offer appropriate undertakings or security if courts require indemnities for wrongful restraint.

Preserving documentary and electronic evidence

Applications should request both preservation and, where relevant, supervised inspection or forensic imaging. Courts may permit expert-assisted preservation or the appointment of neutral custodians. Where cross‑border custodians exist, seek coordinated orders and involve local regulators or service‑provider processes early.

Enforcement and cross‑border challenges

Orders from either an emergency arbitrator or a Turkish court should be drafted with enforceability in mind: identify underlying legal bases, provide clear notice mechanisms for third parties (banks, custodians) and consider registration procedures. Cross‑border enforcement of interim measures remains complex; where assets reside outside Türkiye, parallel applications in other jurisdictions or use of provisional relief compatible with local regimes may be required.

Drafting practical relief applications

Key drafting tips:

• Provide precise factual chronology showing imminent risk.
• Attach transactional evidence and financial traces where available.
• Propose narrowly tailored, time‑limited measures to reduce court reluctance.
• Offer confidentiality protocols and undertakings where business secrecy is a concern.

Coordinating arbitration strategy with provisional relief

Interim relief is a component of overall arbitration strategy. Consider how measures might affect relations with the opposing party, evidentiary discovery and eventual enforcement. Use provisional relief to secure preservation and leverage negotiation, but remain mindful of proportionality and reputational risks.

Case management and follow‑through

After securing measures, maintain a clear compliance and monitoring plan: verify asset freezes, update preservation logs, engage forensic experts for ongoing evidence integrity and prepare for adversary challenges to the measures. Timely reporting to the tribunal and courts maintains legitimacy for the relief obtained.

Conclusion

For arbitrations seated in Türkiye, a hybrid approach—combining emergency arbitral mechanisms where available, targeted applications to Turkish courts and robust forensic preservation—offers the best protection for assets and evidentiary rights. Early tactical planning, precise drafting and readiness to provide undertakings will increase the likelihood of securing effective interim relief.

Av. Burak Şahin of Şahin Hukuk advises clients on arbitration strategy, provisional relief and dispute preservation measures for cases with a Turkish seat.