Are Interim Measures Issued by Arbitrators Enforceable in Moroccan Courts? (2026 Guide)

One of the most consequential questions in Moroccan arbitration practice is whether interim measures issued by arbitrators can be recognised and enforced through the national courts. Since Morocco promulgated Law No. 95-17 on arbitration and conventional mediation (Loi n° 95-17 relative à l’arbitrage et à la médiation conventionnelle), the answer has become significantly clearer, and more favourable to parties seeking urgent relief. This 2026 guide breaks down the statutory basis under Law 95-17, the step-by-step court enforcement procedure including ex parte orders, security for costs requirements, appeal routes, and the practical documents counsel must prepare.

Whether you are an in-house legal team protecting assets during a commercial dispute or a creditor pursuing conservatory attachment before an award is rendered, the procedural roadmap below reflects how Moroccan courts are handling interim measures in arbitration right now.

Quick Answer: Are Interim Measures Issued by Arbitrators Enforceable in Courts?

Yes. Under Morocco’s current arbitration framework, interim measures issued by arbitrators are enforceable through the Moroccan courts, subject to specific procedural requirements. The enforceability rests on three pillars:

• Statutory authority. Law No. 95-17, promulgated by Dahir n° 1-22-34 and published in Bulletin Officiel n° 7099, expressly empowers arbitral tribunals to order conservatory and interim measures (mesures conservatoires and mesures provisoires). Article 43 of the law provides the primary legal basis.
• Court enforcement route. A party seeking to enforce an arbitral interim order in Morocco applies to the President of the competent tribunal, typically the Commercial Court or, in international arbitration matters, the Court of Appeal, through the exequatur procedure or a separate judicial conservatory order.
• Practical timeline. From the date the arbitral tribunal issues its interim order, industry observers expect that a well-prepared enforcement application can reach a court decision within approximately seven to fourteen days, depending on urgency and whether the application is made ex parte.

Understanding when and how this works, and what can go wrong, requires a closer look at the statute, the tribunal’s inherent limits, and the evolving practice of Moroccan appellate courts.

Law 95-17 Morocco Arbitration: Statutory Basis and Article 43 Explained

Morocco’s arbitration landscape was modernised with the promulgation of Law No. 95-17 (Loi relative à l’arbitrage et à la médiation conventionnelle), replacing the prior framework that had governed arbitration under the Code of Civil Procedure. The statute was promulgated by Dahir n° 1-22-34 and published in Bulletin Officiel n° 7099 on 13 June 2022, entering into force the following day. This law governs both domestic and international arbitration seated in Morocco and introduces provisions directly inspired by the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, including its 2006 amendments on interim measures.

Law 95-17 is divided into sections covering the arbitration agreement, composition of tribunals, conduct of proceedings, interim and conservatory measures, awards, exequatur, annulment, and international arbitration. Its treatment of interim relief represents a marked departure from the older regime, which was largely silent on the enforceability of provisional orders issued by arbitrators.

What Article 43 of Law 95-17 Permits, A Practical Reading

Article 43 of Law 95-17 is the central provision authorising arbitral tribunals to order interim and conservatory measures. In practical terms, it permits the tribunal, at the request of a party, to order any provisional or conservatory measure it deems necessary for the proper conduct of the arbitration, provided the measure does not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national courts. This includes, but is not limited to, orders for the preservation of evidence, the freezing of assets, the maintenance of the status quo, and security for the amount in dispute.

Critically, Article 43 also contemplates that the tribunal may require the requesting party to provide appropriate security (garantie) as a condition of granting the measure. This mirrors the approach adopted in Article 17 of the UNCITRAL Model Law and creates a practical safeguard against abusive or speculative requests.

For counsel drafting an application, the key practical takeaway from Article 43 is that the tribunal’s power is broad but not self-executing. The arbitral tribunal can order the measure; it cannot compel compliance. Enforcement requires recourse to the Moroccan courts.

Interaction with the UNCITRAL Model Law

Morocco’s adoption of Law 95-17 deliberately aligned the country’s arbitration framework with the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, particularly Chapter IV A on interim measures and preliminary orders. While the Moroccan statute does not replicate the Model Law verbatim, the conceptual architecture, empowering tribunals to order interim relief while preserving court-assisted enforcement, is substantially consistent. This alignment is significant for international practitioners because it signals Morocco’s commitment to the internationally accepted standard for interim measures in arbitration, making recognition of arbitral interim orders more predictable for parties from Model Law jurisdictions.

Tribunal Power vs National Courts: Scope and Limits of Interim Measures in Morocco Arbitration

While Law 95-17 grants arbitral tribunals broad authority to issue interim and conservatory orders, there are inherent limits that practitioners must understand. An arbitral tribunal’s power under Article 43 covers measures such as asset freezes (saisies conservatoires), orders to preserve documents or evidence, injunctions to maintain the status quo, and directions for the provision of security. However, the tribunal lacks coercive enforcement power, it cannot compel a bank to freeze an account, direct a public registry to block a transfer, or sanction a non-compliant party through the state’s enforcement machinery.

This is where the national courts step in. Under Moroccan practice, a party that obtains an interim measure from an arbitral tribunal but faces non-compliance must petition the competent court, either the President of the Tribunal de Commerce for domestic commercial arbitrations or the President of the Court of Appeal for international arbitrations, to give effect to the order. The courts do not review the merits of the arbitral decision; their role is limited to verifying that the order is valid on its face, that it does not conflict with Moroccan public policy (ordre public), and that the procedural requirements for recognition have been met.

Emergency Arbitrator Orders: Enforceability Issues and Seat Implications

A growing number of arbitrations administered under institutional rules (ICC, LCIA, and others) involve emergency arbitrator procedures that can issue orders before the main tribunal is constituted. Law 95-17 does not specifically address emergency arbitrator orders. The likely practical effect is that Moroccan courts may treat such orders with caution, particularly where the emergency arbitrator was appointed under rules not expressly incorporated into the arbitration agreement or where the seat is outside Morocco. Counsel seeking to enforce an emergency arbitrator’s order in Morocco should anticipate that the court may require additional evidence of the arbitrator’s authority, the parties’ consent to emergency procedures, and compliance with notification requirements.

Early indications from Moroccan commercial court practice suggest that courts are more receptive to interim orders issued by duly constituted tribunals than to emergency arbitrator decisions, though the jurisprudence on this specific point remains limited.

Enforcing Arbitral Interim Measures in Moroccan Courts: Exequatur, Ex Parte Orders, and Practice

The practical enforcement of an arbitral interim measure in Morocco follows a structured path. The procedure differs slightly depending on whether the arbitration is domestic or international, but the core steps are consistent.

Step 1, Identify the Competent Court

For domestic arbitrations, the application for enforcement is filed with the President of the Tribunal de Commerce (Président du Tribunal de Commerce) in the jurisdiction where enforcement is sought. For international arbitrations seated in Morocco, or foreign-seated arbitrations where enforcement is sought in Morocco, the application is directed to the President of the Court of Appeal (Cour d’Appel) having jurisdiction. Law 95-17 allocates specific competences to the presidential jurisdiction (juge des référés) for urgent matters, including conservatory measures that support or give effect to arbitral orders.

Step 2, Prepare the Required Documents

The application must be accompanied by a complete dossier. Courts expect the following:

• Certified copy of the arbitral interim order. This must be the original or a certified true copy issued by the arbitral tribunal or the administering institution.
• The arbitration agreement. Either the original contract containing the arbitration clause or a certified copy of the submission agreement.
• Sworn translations. If the order and underlying documents are not in Arabic, certified translations into Arabic (and, in practice, French) prepared by a sworn translator (traducteur assermenté) are required.
• Power of attorney. A duly executed and legalised power of attorney authorising the Moroccan counsel to act.
• Affidavit of urgency and irreparable harm. A detailed statement, supported by evidence, demonstrating why the interim measure is necessary and why delay would cause irreparable harm (préjudice irréparable).
• Proof of notification. Evidence that the opposing party was duly notified of the arbitral proceedings and the interim order (unless the application is ex parte).

Step 3, Filing Ex Parte Applications (Requêtes en Référé)

In cases of extreme urgency, Moroccan courts can grant ex parte conservatory relief, that is, without prior notice to the opposing party. Ex parte orders in Morocco require the applicant to demonstrate imminent risk of asset dissipation, destruction of evidence, or other irreversible harm. Courts apply strict evidentiary standards: vague assertions of risk are insufficient. Counsel should include bank statements, commercial correspondence, corporate registry extracts, or other concrete evidence showing that the opposing party is likely to frustrate enforcement if given advance notice.

In practice, courts in Casablanca and Marrakech have granted ex parte seizure orders (saisies conservatoires) in support of arbitration, but typically require the applicant to post a security deposit or guarantee to protect the opposing party’s interests in case the order is later reversed. Decisions from the Casablanca Court of Appeal have confirmed this approach, conditioning ex parte relief on the posting of adequate security.

Step 4, Obtain and Execute the Court Order

Once the President grants the enforcement order, the party can proceed with execution through a court-appointed enforcement agent (huissier de justice). The enforcement agent serves the order on the relevant parties, banks, registries, third-party debtors, and takes the necessary steps to give effect to the measure.

Security for Costs Morocco: Conservatory Remedies and How Courts Decide

Security for costs (cautionnement or garantie) plays a dual role in Moroccan arbitration enforcement practice. First, the arbitral tribunal itself may, under Article 43 of Law 95-17, condition the grant of an interim measure on the requesting party posting adequate security. Second, Moroccan courts may independently require a security deposit when a party applies for judicial conservatory relief, particularly in ex parte applications, to protect the opposing party from unjustified loss.

The amount of security is determined on a case-by-case basis and is not subject to fixed statutory thresholds. Courts consider the value of the assets at stake, the strength of the applicant’s case on the merits (as apparent from the arbitral proceedings), the potential harm to the opposing party if the measure is later reversed, and the financial capacity of both parties. Industry observers note that Moroccan courts have become more sophisticated in calibrating security requirements, reflecting the increased volume of commercial arbitrations since Law 95-17 came into force.

Evidence to Prove Risk and Irreparable Harm

Whether applying to the tribunal or the court, the party seeking interim measures must demonstrate a genuine risk of irreparable harm and urgency. Moroccan courts expect concrete, documented evidence rather than speculative claims. Effective evidence includes:

• Financial records showing the opposing party’s deteriorating solvency or active asset dissipation (bank movements, recent property transfers, corporate restructurings).
• Commercial correspondence indicating an intention to relocate assets, cease operations, or frustrate a future award.
• Expert reports or valuations confirming the nature and extent of the harm that would result from inaction.
• Third-party attestations or registry extracts demonstrating that the status quo is under threat.

Procedural Checklist: Documents, Bilingual Filing Tips, and Model Timeline

Practitioners unfamiliar with Moroccan court practice should pay particular attention to the procedural formalities. Failing to include required documents or to comply with translation and legalisation requirements is the most common cause of delay.

Complete Document Checklist

Bilingual Filing Tips

Moroccan courts operate in Arabic, though French is widely used in commercial litigation and arbitration. All filings and supporting documents must be submitted in Arabic; however, providing a parallel French version is strongly advisable and is often expected by commercial courts in Casablanca and Rabat. When the arbitral order is in English or another language, the sworn translation into Arabic is mandatory, and a French translation will assist the court in reviewing the substance of the order more efficiently.

Model Enforcement Timeline

Appeals, Setting Aside, and the New York Convention Morocco Interaction

Understanding the distinction between exequatur and setting aside (recours en annulation) is essential for any party involved in enforcing arbitral interim measures in Morocco.

Exequatur is the procedure by which a Moroccan court grants recognition and enforcement to an arbitral decision. For interim measures, this typically involves an application to the President of the competent court, who verifies formal requirements and public policy compliance without reviewing the merits.

Setting aside is a separate recourse available to the party against whom the award or order was made. A setting-aside application is filed with the Court of Appeal and challenges the validity of the arbitral decision on limited grounds (e. g. , lack of jurisdiction, procedural irregularity, violation of public policy). Moroccan court practice, as reflected in decisions from the Casablanca and Marrakech Courts of Appeal, has clarified that filing an annulment application does not automatically suspend enforcement, but the Court of Appeal may, on application, order a stay of execution pending the outcome of the setting-aside proceedings.

The doctrine of dessaisissement (the tribunal being divested of jurisdiction once an award is rendered) interacts with these procedures, and recent jurisprudence has addressed how presidential competence operates where annulment and exequatur applications run in parallel.

Regarding the New York Convention, Morocco is a signatory state. However, the New York Convention applies to the recognition and enforcement of final arbitral awards, not interim measures. The enforcement of interim measures is therefore governed by Moroccan national law, principally Law 95-17, rather than by the Convention. This distinction is critical: parties cannot rely solely on the New York Convention to enforce a provisional order in Morocco. They must follow the domestic enforcement route outlined above.

Practical Tips and Common Pitfalls When Seeking Interim Measures in Morocco

• Preserve originals. Moroccan courts expect original or certified copies of all arbitral orders and agreements. Digital copies alone are insufficient.
• Commission translations early. Sworn translations can take several days. Begin the translation process as soon as the interim order is issued.
• Draft the urgency affidavit with precision. Generic statements of harm will not satisfy the court. Attach concrete exhibits, financial records, registry searches, correspondence.
• Anticipate security requirements. Prepare a bank guarantee or deposit in advance, especially for ex parte applications. Delays in posting security can derail the entire enforcement timeline.
• Avoid premature filings. Filing an enforcement application before the arbitral order is formally issued or before notification has been completed can result in dismissal on procedural grounds.
• Consider parallel relief. Where the seat of arbitration is outside Morocco, consider obtaining injunctive relief from the courts of the seat jurisdiction simultaneously to maximise coverage.
• Monitor annulment risk. If the opposing party is likely to file a setting-aside application, prepare arguments against a stay of execution in advance.

Conclusion

Morocco’s Law 95-17 has transformed the landscape for interim measures in arbitration, providing a clear statutory basis for tribunal-ordered relief and a structured enforcement path through the national courts. The question of whether interim measures issued by arbitrators are enforceable in Moroccan courts now has a definitive affirmative answer, but the practical outcome depends entirely on preparation, procedural compliance, and an understanding of how Moroccan courts apply the rules. Counsel handling cross-border disputes with a Moroccan enforcement dimension should treat this enforcement framework as a tactical tool: one that requires early planning, precise documentation, and close attention to the evolving practice of the commercial courts and Courts of Appeal.

Explore the Morocco litigation lawyer directory for specialist support with arbitration enforcement and conservatory measures.

Sources

1. Portail juridique, Ministère de la Justice (Dahir / Loi n° 95-17 PDF)
2. Secrétariat Général du Gouvernement, Bulletin Officiel
3. UNCITRAL, Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration
4. WIPO Lex, New York Convention Status (Morocco)
5. Jurisprudence.ma, Published Moroccan Court Decisions under Law 95-17
6. ICSID / World Bank, Born, Provisional Relief in International Arbitration