Briefing

The new ICC Arbitration Rules are coming – What are the key changes?

The ICC recently announced that its Rules of Arbitration have undergone the most substantial revision since 2012. The new rules will enter into force on 1 June 2026. At the ICC Tokyo Arbitration Day, the ICC President, Claudia Salomon, gave the audience a preview of what to expect in the upcoming changes, as well as insights into the deliberations on the changes, and those aspects of the rules that the ICC carefully considered, but ultimately decided to leave undisturbed. So, what is changing?

In short, the updates will bring the rules into line with current practice, seek to streamline and simplify arbitration procedure and introduce a new highly expedited procedure.

So, what do you need to know?

There are seven key changes:

1. The Terms of Reference will be eliminated

Terms of reference (TORs) have been a distinctive feature of ICC international arbitration since its inception over 100 years ago. However, the ICC has taken the view that TORs are no longer necessary. The decision has been influenced by the positive experience of expedited arbitration, which does not require TORs. While TORs can still be used as a case management tool, they will no longer be mandatory. The cut off for bringing new claims (without permission of the Tribunal) will now be the first case management conference. The practical effect is that parties will need to be more proactive in identifying the claims that they wish to pursue in the arbitration.

2. Enhanced procedure for Arbitrator independence and impartiality

The high standards of independence and impartiality required of ICC appointed arbitrators will not change. The parties will, however, be obliged to provide a list of related entities and individuals from the outset. Arbitrators will still need to make disclosures as they do now (i.e. including disclosure of relationships with entities that are not identified in the parties’ lists). However, the lists will facilitate more transparent disclosure. The ICC President has stated that the process of disclosure “shouldn’t be a hide and seek process“. The ICC will also encourage any issues on disclosure to be decided in favour of disclosure. The rules will further clarify that a disclosure, without more, does not indicate a lack of independence and impartiality.

3. Communications to be electronic

All communications (including filing documents) will now be electronic, via email, Case Connect or other electronic means. Parties will retain the ability to request, and the ICC will provide, hard copies – for example, where hard copies are required to comply with service obligations in a particular jurisdiction. After consulting with the parties and considering all relevant circumstances, arbitrators will not be permitted to sign awards electronically and in counterparts.

4. Time limits for issuing awards will be fixed by the President

The ICC recognises that the 6-month time limit for issuing arbitral awards is commonly extended, often by a considerable period of time. The ICC President remarked that it is not appropriate to have a rule that all arbitration practitioners know will not be followed in practice. Having considered abolishing the time limit altogether, the ICC has instead elected to adopt a more flexible approach recognising that some jurisdictions require awards to be issued within a particular period of time: The President will now determine the time limits.

5. The threshold for expedited procedure increases from USD 3m to USD 4m

The ICC has increased the threshold for use of the expedited procedure to USD 4m. Having considered an indexation approach, the ICC ultimately decided to set an updated threshold. The ICC recognised that the expedited procedure is often used for disputes with significantly higher value than this threshold. The ICC President noted that the ICC has conducted expedited arbitrations for claims with values over USD 100M, including instances where the claimed amount exceeded USD 200M. Parties are also increasingly specifying expedited arbitrations in contracts valued at USD 20M or less, on the basis that certainty as to the duration of the arbitration is more valuable than the opportunity to make additional submissions.

6. Introduction of a highly expedited procedure

The ICC has provided for an even more expedited procedure than the current 6 months. The highly expedited procedure will provide a final, binding award within 3 months reflecting the need for urgent and time critical, enforceable awards. It will be a streamlined, ‘opt-in’ procedure and is being considered as a pilot project, which will be kept under review. The key features are:

Decision may be determined on the documents only and without a hearing;
Parties can agree to there being an award issued without reasons;
No joinder or consolidation will be permitted;
Requests for arbitration must include a statement of claim, and answers must include a defence;
Evidence, arguments and witness statements need to be provided on the front end.

7. Confidentiality

The ICC considered making ICC arbitrations confidential by default. However, the ICC ultimately decided not to do so, on the basis that:

Blanket confidentiality would force parties to draft away from the default position, creating difficulties in identifying and negotiating appropriate exceptions to confidentiality;
Government parties to ICC arbitrations may require a greater degree of transparency than would be permitted by a blanket imposition of confidentiality.

Whilst confidentiality will not always be the default position, the rules will now include an express confidentiality obligation on the arbitrators.

The full rules will be published in the run up to launch on 1 June 2026, with updates to other rules such as the mediation rules, to follow in due course.

A final thought

Any changes that assist in streamlining the arbitration process are welcomed. Among the proposed revisions, the Highly Expedited Procedure is likely to attract significant attention across a range of sectors, particularly construction and energy, as well as intellectual property, technology related disputes and M&A arbitrations, where the ability to secure a rapid and final determination is often critical.

In the construction and energy context, how this procedure will interact with DAB and adjudication mechanisms remains to be seen. However, our initial view is that it could prove a valuable additional tool for achieving timely, contemporaneous final resolution of issues central to the delivery of major projects. These may include disputes over development commitments or final investment decisions, design standards, serial defects, acceleration instructions, or the application of liquidated damages to interim milestones.

With over 40% of ICC cases involving construction and energy disputes, we will be watching with interest how widely this is adopted in by the sector.