The 2026 revised ICC Arbitration Rules one-stop--shop institutional rules?

The ICC Arbitration Rules have recently been revised, effective from 1 June 2026 (the “2026 ICC Rules”). The changes made in this revision of the Rules reflect the ongoing evolution of arbitration practice, and seek to provide for more efficient, flexible and cost-effective case management of disputes. With the institution administering cases in 2025 ranging from just under US$2,500 to US$31 billion, the revisions aim to ensure the ICC can cater for disputes of any value, complexity or urgency.

This article focuses on three key changes. First, we will discuss the removal of a formerly distinctive feature of ICC arbitration, the mandatory Terms of Reference. Second, we will turn to the introduction of an early determination procedure, which aims to dispose of meritless claims and defences much more quickly. Third, we will cover the introduction of the Highly-Expedited Arbitration Procedure, which aims to provide a streamlined process for smaller disputes.

Terms of Reference

In a welcome change for practitioners, arbitrators and parties alike, the 2026 ICC Rules no longer require the arbitral Tribunal to prepare Terms of Reference upon receipt of the parties’ case file and submissions. While Terms of Reference are in theory useful in recording key information about the dispute, they were also intended to contain the list of issues in dispute between the parties to focus the arbitral process. In practice, however, Tribunals have often dispensed with this exercise at an early stage of the proceedings because the scope of disputes is so often heavily contested.

Removing this requirement inevitably reduces costs and allows for greater flexibility to deploy Terms of Reference as a discretionary case management tool, at any stage.  It also shifts the parties’ focus to the initial CMC, which Article 24(1) states is to be held within 30 days of receipt of the file. Under the revised Rules, no new claims may be introduced after the initial CMC without the permission of the Tribunal, who will take into account any cost implications (in addition to the nature of the new claims, the stage of proceedings and other relevant circumstances, as set out in Article 25). Parties will therefore need to aim to fully particularise their case before the initial CMC, since there might not be a further opportunity to do so later.

Early determination

The Rules now set out at Article 30 that parties can apply to the Tribunal for early determination of claims or defences that are either manifestly without merit or outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. The introduction of this procedure in the 2026 ICC Rules creates a useful mechanism to dispense with frivolous claims or defences early on, thus saving time and reducing costs. This reflects guidance until now contained in the ICC Note to the Parties. 

Upon receipt of such an application, the Tribunal will determine, in its discretion, whether the application should be allowed to proceed. If so, the Rules confer wide discretion on the Tribunal to decide on the appropriate procedural measures in consultation with the parties, one key objective being to ensure that the responding party is given a fair opportunity to oppose the application. If the application succeeds, the decision of the Tribunal may take the form of an order or award, and costs may either be determined at that stage or reserved for later determination.

It remains to be seen how frequently Tribunals will exercise their discretion.

Highly-Expedited Arbitration Procedure

The 2026 ICC Rules have also introduced (in Article 33) the opt-in Highly-Expedited Arbitration Procedure (“HEAP”), which provides for an even tighter and more cost-effective procedural timetable than the existing expedited procedure (first launched in 2017). This applies to disputes of any value and is particularly suitable for parties seeking a quick resolution, or for lower-complexity disputes, such as those limited to the interpretation of simple legal issues or those involving no, or only limited, factual and expert evidence. Parties should note, however, that: (1) joinder and consolidation are not permitted under HEAP; and (2) parties may opt for an award without reasons and/or an award rendered without a hearing or examination of witnesses or experts. The ICC has indicated that parties will need to consider any enforcement challenges in relation to awards without reasons, depending on the laws of the jurisdiction(s) where the award is ultimately enforced.

Other key changes

Other notable changes in this revision of the ICC Rules include:

electronic communication as the default means for written communication with the Secretariat, as well as for submission of the Request, Answer, and any Request for Joinder (set out in Article 3);

• enhancing the arbitrator’s duty of disclosure to ensure that independence or impartiality are not compromised by mandating that any doubts the arbitrator may have about making a disclosure shall be addressed by making the relevant disclosure. A disclosure does not, by itself, establish a lack of independence or impartiality (set out in Article 12);
• increasing the threshold for the applicability of the existing ICC Expedited Procedure Provisions from disputes of US$3 million or less to disputes of up to US$4 million for arbitration agreements concluded on or after 1 June 2026 (in Article 1(3) of Appendix V);
• expanding the scope of the emergency arbitration provisions so that they may also be initiated against “any party for which the President is satisfied, based on information in the Application, that an arbitration agreement binding such party may exist” (Article 1(2) of Appendix IV of the 2026 ICC Rules); and
• dispensing with the six-month time limit for rendering the final award from the last signature of the Terms of Reference, which in practice was rarely met, being unrealistically short. 

Comment

The 2026 ICC Rules introduce a significant number of modernisations and clearly signal the ICC’s intent to offer a more flexible and efficient arbitral framework, with a wider range of tools that Tribunals and parties can deploy to tailor procedure to the needs of a case.  The removal of mandatory Terms of Reference, the introduction of a formal early determination mechanism and the new HEAP regime all have the potential to reduce time and costs.  Ultimately, however, it will only become clear over the coming years whether the potential of these reforms is fully realised based on how Tribunals and parties shape arbitral procedure. 

With thanks to Trainee Solicitor Andra Tofan for her contributions.

If you would like to discuss the 2026 ICC Rules, please reach out to your usual Hausfeld contact, Ned Beale (nbeale@hausfeld.com) or Lucy Pert (lpert@hausfeld.com), Co-Heads of Hausfeld’s Commercial Disputes Practice.