ICC Arbitration Rules 2026 – The Key Changes at a Glance

Introduction

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) has released its 2026 Rules of Arbitration (the “ICC Rules”), to replace the ICC Rules 2021. The new Rules become effective on 1 June 2026 and will apply to any ICC arbitrations commenced on or after that date, unless the parties have agreed to submit to a version of the Rules in effect on another date (Article 1(2)).

The key changes include:

• Abolition of the Terms of Reference, to be replaced by an enhanced initial Case Management Conference (CMC); 
• Strengthened disclosure obligations on arbitrators and a new express duty to resolve doubts in favour of disclosure; 
• An increase in the monetary threshold for the Expedited Procedure, and the introduction of a new Highly Expedited Procedure; 
• Updated Emergency Arbitrator provisions, including new Preliminary Orders; 
• A new early determination mechanism for claims manifestly without merit;
• Removal of the six-month time limit for rendering final awards; and 
• Minor changes to the provisions on governance, electronic communications, and fees and costs.

These updates align the ICC Rules with recent changes adopted by other institutions and go further in some areas, reflecting calls from parties to provide shorter and more efficient processes for certain cases.

1. Terms of Reference

One of the most notable changes is the removal of the requirement in Article 23 of the 2021 Rules for the tribunal to draw up Terms of Reference. In place of this, the tribunal must hold an initial CMC within 20 days of receipt of the file from the Secretariat, to establish the timetable and other procedural measures (Article 24). If not established during the initial CMC, the procedural timetable must be set as soon as possible afterwards.

The previous restriction on making new claims after approval of the Terms of Reference is now linked to the initial CMC. No party may make new claims after the initial CMC unless authorised to do so by the tribunal, who will consider a number of factors including the nature of the claim, cost, and the stage of arbitration (Article 25). 

CMS comment: for arbitration users, this change eliminates an extra (and sometimes time-consuming) procedural step, which was often delegated to the parties. That being said, this should not serve as an indication for arbitrators to refrain from actively managing proceedings where appropriate. Narrowing the scope of the dispute at an early stage, where possible, enables parties to achieve meaningful time and costs savings and an early CMC should assist with that process.

2. Independence, Impartiality and Disclosure

Several changes have been introduced to the provisions governing arbitrator independence, impartiality and the duty to disclose:

1. Duty to resolve doubts in favour of disclosure (Article 12(2)): a new sentence has been added to what was previously Article 11(2), providing that "any doubts the prospective arbitrator may have about whether to make a disclosure shall be resolved in favour of disclosure." 
2. Ongoing duty of disclosure (Article 12(3)): the language of what was previously Article 11(3) has been strengthened, to clarify that an arbitrator’s duty to disclose is ongoing.
3. Disclosure does not establish lack of independence or impartiality (Article 12(4)): it is now expressly confirmed that a disclosure does not inherently demonstrate a lack of independence or impartiality. 
4. Parties' duty to provide information for disclosure purposes (Article 12(5)): each party is now obliged, when filing its Request, Answer, Request for Joinder, Answer to a Request for Joinder or request for extension of time, to submit a list of persons and entities to assist the arbitrators in complying with their disclosure obligations. 
5. Arbitrators' confidentiality obligations (Article 12(8)): arbitrators now have an express obligation to ensure that all information relating to the arbitration which is not already in the public domain remains confidential, unless otherwise agreed between the parties or as required by applicable law. 

CMS comment: this clarification as to the scope of disclosure broadly aligns the ICC Rules with section 2 of the Arbitration Act 2025, which places a similar duty on prospective arbitrators to disclose any circumstances of which they “ought reasonably to be aware” that “might reasonably give rise to justifiable doubts as to the individual’s impartiality in relation to the proceedings”.  Similarly, the codification of arbitrators’ confidentiality obligations represents welcome certainty for parties, and clarifies existing practice. 

3. Expedited Procedures

The Expedited Procedure provisions have also been updated and amended:

1. Increased financial threshold (Appendix V, Article 1(3)): the threshold amount for the Expedited Procedure has been increased to US$ 4,000,000 for arbitration agreements concluded on or after 1 June 2026. For agreements concluded between 1 January 2021 and 1 June 2026, the threshold remains at US$ 3,000,000, and for those concluded between 1 March 2017 and 1 January 2021, it remains at US$ 2,000,000.
2. Time limit for the final award (Appendix V, Article 4): the tribunal must render its final award within six months of the date of the initial CMC, unless this timeline is extended by the President of the Court. This replaces the previous extension provisions, which were determined by the Court. 
3. New Highly Expedited Procedure (Appendix VI): an entirely new Highly Expedited Procedure has been introduced, applicable by agreement between the parties. Key features of this new procedure include the requirement for a combined Request and Statement of Claim (as well as a combined Answer and Statement of Defence), a sole arbitrator, prohibitions on joinder and consolidation, and a three-month time limit for the final award. 

CMS comment: in relation to the Expedited Procedure, the ICC has maintained its existing approach of linking the complexity of a dispute with its monetary value. In some cases, lower value disputes may be highly complex and higher value disputes may be simple but there is an option for parties to opt into the Expedited Procedure even for larger value claims. The new Highly Expedited Procedure, which will only apply by agreement between the parties and has no monetary threshold, is welcome. Parties should consider incorporating this procedure into standard arbitration clauses for certain types of lower value or lower risk contracts, in order to benefit from potentially significant time and costs savings in the event of a dispute. Aside from the lack of monetary threshold, Appendix VI also mirrors the new Streamlined Procedure introduced in the SIAC Rules 2025 (Rule 13 and Schedule 2), which provides that awards are to be made within three months for low complexity disputes with a value not exceeding S$1 million.

4. Emergency Arbitrator

The 2026 Rules introduce notable changes to the Emergency Arbitrator procedure, now contained in Appendix IV:

1. Expanded scope of application (Appendix IV, Article 1(2)(c)): the procedure previously applied only to signatories to the arbitration agreement and their successors, but has now been extended to “any party for which the President is satisfied, based on information in the Application, that an arbitration agreement binding such party may exist.”
2. Preliminary Orders (Appendix IV, Article 7): a new mechanism has been introduced whereby any party may request a Preliminary Order, which directs the other party not to frustrate the purpose of the Emergency Arbitrator application. A Preliminary Order may be requested and decided upon without notice to the other parties, although if granted, the Emergency Arbitrator must then allow other parties a reasonable opportunity to present their case. 
3. Investment protection law exclusion (Appendix IV, Article 1(3)(c)): the previous exclusion from the Emergency Arbitrator procedure of arbitration agreements arising from treaties has been expanded to also cover investment protection laws. 

CMS comment: prospective parties should note Article 1(2)(c) of Appendix IV in particular, as they may now (albeit rarely) find themselves involved in arbitration proceedings where they may not have believed at the outset that an arbitration agreement existed. In the usual way, parties should ensure that arbitration clauses are drafted clearly for certainty. 

5. Interim Measures

A new mechanism for the early determination of claims and defences has been introduced in Article 30. Any party may apply to the tribunal for early determination on the grounds that a claim or defence is either: (a) “manifestly without merit”; or (b) “manifestly outside the arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction”. The application shall be determined at the tribunal’s discretion, and if successful, the tribunal shall, in consultation with the parties, apply appropriate procedural measures.

CMS comment: this measure formally codifies what has long been regarded as an implicit power of the tribunal, albeit one which arbitrators have arguably been hesitant to exercise. This brings the ICC into line with the Preliminary Determination mechanism in Rule 46 of the SIAC Rules 2025. CMS previously called for similar changes in our 2024 publication ‘Making efficiency a reality - A call for more early determination provisions’.

6. Other Changes

1. Removal of the six-month time limit for final award (Article 34): previously, the tribunal was to render its final award within six months from the date of the last signature of the Terms of Reference (or the date of notification to the tribunal of the Court's approval of the Terms of Reference). This time limit has been removed in the 2026 Rules given it was routinely extended by the ICC Court well beyond that six month limit, in many cases extended on multiple occasions. The time limit is now fixed by the President, taking into account the procedural timetable or a reasoned request from the tribunal.
2. Governance changes (Appendix 1, Articles 5 and 6): the 2026 Rules introduce a number of governance changes, including a new right of the President to suspend any member or Vice-President who violates the Rules, attacks the Court’s integrity or otherwise causes harm to the Court. There is also a new provision enabling the Executive Board to appoint replacement Court members during periods between World Council meetings.
3. Electronic communications (Articles 3(1) and 3(2)): electronic communication will now be the default mechanism for written communications with the Secretariat, as well as the default method for submissions of the Request, Answer and any Request for Joinder.
4. Fees and costs (Appendix III, Articles 1(1) and 6(2)): there is the new addition of a Schedule of Fees, which will set out the scales of the arbitrators’ fees and the ICC’s administrative expenses, and is issued by the Secretary General on approval from the Executive Board. There are also two additional factors which the Court must now take into account when fixing the tribunal’s fees, namely whether the proceedings terminated before the final award was rendered, and the quality of the draft award.

CMS comment: the removal of the six-month time limit for the final award will have limited impact in practice but reflects the reality of (non-expedited) ICC arbitrations. 

Conclusion

The ICC Arbitration Rules 2026 represent a significant modernisation of the ICC's procedural framework for arbitration. The removal of the Terms of Reference, the introduction of early determination and Preliminary Orders, and the expansion of Expedited Procedures reflect a clear emphasis on efficiency and flexibility. At the same time, the strengthened disclosure requirements, enhanced confidentiality provisions, and governance reforms promote transparency and institutional integrity. 

For further information, please get in touch with the authors of this article or your usual CMS contact.

The authors are grateful to Lily Clarke, Trainee Solicitor, for her valuable assistance in the preparation of this article.