Speed and Efficiency in International Commercial Arbitration: Fact or Fiction?

At a Glance

• Traditional arbitration cases at leading institutions (ICC, AAA-ICDR, LCIA) have median durations of 20-22 months, challenging claims of quick resolution.
• Expedited arbitration procedures, increasingly popular and often automatic for lower-value claims, deliver awards much faster — over 60% within six months — offering parties genuine speed and certainty.

For many years, international arbitration has been touted as a quick and efficient way to resolve cross-border commercial disputes, particularly when compared with litigation alternatives. But for some, this does not ring true. According to case duration analysis conducted in 2024, for three of the preferred international arbitration institutions — the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the American Arbitration Association International Centre for Dispute Resolution (AAA-ICDR), and the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) — the median duration of cases concluded by way of final award was:

• ICC: 22 months¹
• AAA-ICDR: 21.5 months²
• LCIA: 20 months³

One way arbitration institutions have been trying to combat inefficiency is through the introduction of expedited arbitration procedures. Generally, these procedures offer “back to basics” arbitration and apply automatically — subject to certain exceptions — to claims up to a certain value (for example: US$3m for ICC arbitration agreements concluded on or after 1 January 2021; and US$500k for AAA-ICDR arbitration governed by the 2021 ICDR Rules). Whether through automatic application, or by parties opting-in, these types of expedited arbitration are becoming increasingly popular.

The ICC’s recent report — ‘Expedited Procedure Provisions: Eight Years On’ — illustrates how expedited arbitrations take shape. Between 2017-24, there were a total of 865 expedited arbitrations administered by the ICC, of which 461 cases resulted in a final award. Of those 461 cases:

• 96 cases (21%) had a document production phase 
• 26 cases (6%) involved the submission of expert reports
• 251 cases (54%) involved a hearing (lasting between one and four days)
• Of those 251 cases that involved a hearing, post hearing briefs were submitted in only 139 cases (55%)

Crucially, the ICC’s report records ‘of the 461 final awards rendered in cases newly administered under EPP [expedited procedure provisions] from 2017 to 2024, 63% were delivered on or around the six-month time limit.’ That is the type of speed and efficiency that commercial parties want and need, delivering certainty of outcome in a reasonable timeframe at limited cost.

Ultimately, while traditional international arbitration may often fall short of its ambition to achieve rapid resolutions, expedited arbitration procedures do genuinely deliver speed and efficiency when institutions and/or parties embrace them. While automatic expedition applies only to cases of modest value, the principle of party autonomy and the inherent flexibility of international arbitration means it is always open to parties to agree streamlined procedures to suit the specifics of their dispute, whatever its size and strategic significance. This choice of procedure, combined with the choice of institution and tribunal, remains crucial in determining whether the promise of speed and efficiency in any given arbitration is fact or fiction.