At a Glance
- The ICC revised Rules of Arbitration entered into force on 1 June 2026, applying by default to arbitrations commenced on or after that date.
- The revisions reflect a continued institutional focus on efficiency, clarity and usability, against the backdrop of the ICC Court’s highest-ever pending caseload in 2025.
Key Highlights
- Removal of mandatory Terms of Reference, with greater emphasis on early case management.
- Introduction of early determination powers, enabling tribunals to dispose of claims that are manifestly without merit or outside the tribunal’s jurisdiction at an earlier stage.
- Increase in the expedited arbitration threshold to $4 million, bringing more disputes within this fast-track regime under the Expedited Procedure Provisions (EPP).
- Introduction of a new Highly Expedited Arbitration Procedure (HEAP), offering final awards within three months.
- Enhanced disclosure obligations and procedural flexibility, including developments in emergency arbitration, electronic processes and confidentiality.
Practical Implications for Business
The 2026 Rules represent an evolution rather than a transformation of ICC arbitration, reinforcing a clear trend toward speed, efficiency, and early procedural engagement.
In light of these changes, businesses should:
- Review existing arbitration clauses, taking into account the revised EPP threshold and HEAP availability.
- Consider whether to opt in or out of EPP, depending on the nature and value of the underlying contract.
- Prepare cases earlier, given the CMC’s increased importance as a procedural cut-off for new claims.
- Prepare for tribunals to take a more active role in shaping proceedings and scrutinising claims at an earlier stage.
Further detail on these and other changes introduced by the 2026 Rules is set out below.
Abolition of Mandatory Terms of Reference
One of the most notable changes is the removal of mandatory Terms of Reference (ToR) — a document summarising the parties’ claims, relief sought, and issues to be determined. Previously required, ToRs are now optional if the parties consider them useful.
Many users viewed the ToR as adding cost and complexity without materially narrowing disputes at an early stage. The signature requirement also frequently caused delay, particularly with uncooperative parties. Removing the ToR requirement should reduce front-loaded delay and streamline proceedings.
With the ToR removed, the initial Case Management Conference (CMC) becomes the central procedural milestone. The CMC must be held within 30 days of the tribunal’s receipt of the file and now serves as the cut-off for unilateral introduction of new claims under Article 25.
The procedural timetable established at or shortly after the CMC will be communicated to the ICC secretariat (rather than the ICC Court). Parties should ensure all potential claims are identified before the CMC, as new claims raised thereafter require tribunal authorisation.
Introduction of Early Determination
The 2026 Rules introduce Article 30, permitting applications for early determination of claims or defences that are “manifestly without merit” or “manifestly outside the tribunal’s jurisdiction”. Since October 2017, guidance on early determination existed in the ICC’s Note to Parties, but the 2026 revision elevates this practice into the Rules themselves, responding to feedback from the global business community. This aligns the ICC’s framework with other leading arbitral institutions and domestic legal systems.
Under Article 30, the tribunal first decides whether the application should proceed before considering its merits — a structure intended to filter out unmeritorious applications. If used effectively, early determination can significantly reduce time and cost by narrowing issues early. However, unsuccessful applications risk prolonging proceedings.
Much will depend on how robustly tribunals exercise these powers, but the direction is clear: ICC arbitration is moving toward more active case management and earlier scrutiny of weak claims. Notably, the ICC Court will scrutinise any early determination award typically within one week of receipt — signalling institutional support for efficiency gains.
Increased Expedited Procedure Threshold
The monetary threshold for automatic application of the Expedited Procedure Provisions (EPP) under Article 32 and Appendix V has been raised. For arbitration agreements concluded on or after 1 June 2026, EPP applies to cases where the sum in dispute does not exceed $4 million. Prior thresholds remain for older agreements: $3 million (agreements from 1 January 2021 to 31 May 2026) and $2 million (agreements from 1 March 2017 to 31 December 2020).
ICC statistics indicate that sums in dispute did not exceed $4 million in over 40% of cases filed in 2025, so the change should bring a meaningfully larger share of cases within the expedited regime.
This has immediate practical implications. EPP involves procedural simplifications, including default appointment of a sole arbitrator and a six-month award deadline, which may not suit all disputes. Parties should consider whether to opt out of EPP for claims below $4 million, or opt in for higher-value disputes where speed is a priority.
The revised threshold makes it important to align arbitration clauses with the complexity and strategic importance of the underlying contract.
New Highly Expedited Arbitration Procedure (HEAP)
The 2026 Rules introduce the Highly Expedited Arbitration Procedure (HEAP) under Article 33 and Appendix VI for time-sensitive, lower-complexity disputes. HEAP targets a final award within three months of the initial CMC — an ambitious timetable encompassing award drafting, ICC Court scrutiny, and notification to the parties.
HEAP differs from standard EPP through further compressed timelines. Parties have 20 days (not 30) to jointly nominate a sole arbitrator; otherwise, the ICC Court appoints one directly. The CMC must be held within seven days of the arbitrator's receipt of the file. The tribunal may decide solely on documents without hearings. Submissions are front-loaded: the Request for Arbitration must include a Statement of Claim with evidence and authorities; the Answer (due within 30 days) must include a Statement of Defence. Parties may agree to an award without reasons, and joinder and consolidation are prohibited.
HEAP operates on an opt-in basis, requiring specific consent rather than arising from a standard ICC clause. Parties may opt out by agreement at any time, and the ICC Court may decide HEAP should no longer apply.
While HEAP offers speed and enforceability under the New York Convention, it involves trade-offs. The compressed timetable places significant demands on participants, and awards without reasons may raise enforcement considerations in some jurisdictions. HEAP is best suited to discrete, lower-complexity disputes where speed is paramount — such as purchase price adjustments, certain technology claims, or sports disputes — rather than matters requiring extensive factual development.
HEAP suitability does not depend on claim value; it turns on issue complexity and the parties’ interest in a swift outcome.
Enhanced Arbitrator Disclosure and Independence
The 2026 Rules strengthen arbitrator independence and reduce late-stage challenges. Under Article 12(5), parties must now submit, with their Request, Answer, or Request for Joinder, a list of relevant persons and entities that prospective arbitrators should consider in their disclosure assessment, with reasons for inclusion. These lists complement the arbitrator’s own assessment and shift part of the conflict-identification burden onto the parties, discouraging tactical challenges raised later.
The Rules codify that doubts about disclosure should be resolved in favour of disclosure (Article 12(2)), while clarifying that disclosure alone does not imply lack of independence. Tribunal secretaries have similar obligations. Article 14(2) now provides that the Secretary General may refer arbitrator confirmation decisions to the ICC Court even absent a party objection, reinforcing institutional oversight.
Expanded Emergency Arbitration
The 2026 Rules enhance emergency arbitration by expressly permitting emergency arbitrators to issue preliminary orders, including on an ex parte basis, to prevent parties from frustrating applications — addressing concerns such as threatened asset dissipation or evidence destruction. Procedural safeguards require that, following any such order, the emergency arbitrator immediately afford other parties a reasonable opportunity to respond, and may modify or revoke the order based on subsequent submissions. The Rules also extend emergency arbitration to parties for whom an arbitration agreement “may exist”, broadening the scope of potential respondents.
These developments make emergency arbitration a more effective tool for asset preservation and urgent interim relief in fast-moving disputes.
Other Notable Changes
The 2026 Rules also introduce additional reforms enhancing flexibility and modernising procedure:
- Flexible time limits for awards. Under Article 34, the president of the ICC Court now fixes (and may extend) the time limit for the final award based on the procedural timetable or a reasoned tribunal request, replacing the previous fixed six-month deadline.
- Electronic signature and notification of awards. Under Article 38, tribunals may sign awards electronically or in counterparts and request electronic notification.
- Express confidentiality obligation for arbitrators. Article 12(8) requires arbitrators to keep all arbitration matters confidential, subject to exceptions for public information, party agreement, applicable law, or legal rights protection. This obligation does not extend to the parties themselves.
- Default electronic communications. Under Article 3, written communications with the secretariat are now by email or electronic means by default. Hard copies need only be submitted when confirmed delivery is requested or electronic transmission is impracticable.
- Remote and hybrid hearings. The Rules now expressly contemplate hearings, CMCs, and deliberations conducted in person, hybrid, or by videoconference (Articles 19(3), 24(5), and 27(1)).
- Extended correction period. Under Article 39(1), the deadline for tribunal-initiated corrections of clerical errors has been extended from 30 to 45 days, with parties’ comments now required.
- Modification of time limits by agreement. Under Article 4(2), parties may now “modify” (not merely “shorten”) Rule time limits, provided post-constitution agreements are approved by the tribunal.
- Costs and fee administration. The Secretary General now fixes advances on costs (previously a Court function). ICC administrative expenses have been reduced for disputes under $10 million, while targeted upward adjustments have been introduced for larger disputes.
While individually incremental, these changes collectively support a more flexible, technology-enabled arbitration process.
