The role of the judiciary in supporting arbitration panels is a necessity required by the nature of functions performed by arbitration systems in the community, as well as the requirements of protecting the interests of arbitration parties. Due to the importance of this role, this study examines the supporting role of courts in securing evidence and taking temporary and provisional actions; matters which are outside the scope and authority of the arbitration panels. The study conducted a comparative analysis of the Palestinian and Jordanian laws to compare legislative organization of this role, and clarify legal gaps which may face a competent court in its supporting role to an arbitration panel.

The study tried to evaluate the two legislative tracks adopted by Palestinian and Jordanian lawmakers in regulating the limits of court intervention in supporting arbitration panels in performing their functions, on the basis that arbitration is not an alternative for the judiciary, but rather a special means in dispute settlement which involves the assistance of the judiciary. It concluded that effective arbitration requires close cooperation between the competent court and the arbitration panel, but one which must be characterized by precision and good discretion, so that judicial authorities will neither overwhelm the authority of arbitrators, nor trespass the spirit or text of the law