ICC Rules 2026: Key Reforms in Context

The International Chamber of Commerce’s (“ICC”) ICC Rules of Arbitration 2026, which entered into force on 1 June 2026 (the “ICC Rules 2026”), introduce a number of significant procedural reforms to the ICC Rules of Arbitration 2021 (“ICC Rules 2021”). A summary of the key changes can be found here.

This article examines the key reforms, and compares them to the approach under the Singapore International Arbitration Centre’s (“SIAC”) 7^th edition Arbitration Rules (the “SIAC Rules 2025”), which came into force on 1 January 2025. References to “Article” or “Articles” refer to the ICC Rules 2026 while references to “Rule” or “Rules” refer to the SIAC Rules 2025.

Terms of Reference

A significant update in the ICC Rules 2026 is the removal of the tribunal’s obligation to draw up a Terms of Reference (“ToR”) – although tribunals do retain the discretion to prepare them on a voluntary basis where the circumstances warrant it.

The SIAC Rules 2025 do not require the preparation of a ToR. The equivalent mechanism is found in Rule 34.1, which provides that the tribunal "shall, in consultation with the parties, and at the appropriate stages of the arbitration, use reasonable efforts to identify the issues to be determined in the arbitration and record them in a procedural order". This approach provides a framework for issue identification.

With the removal of the ToR, the ICC's initial Case Management Conference ("CMC") now serves as the primary procedural milestone, with a hard cut-off for the inclusion of new claims thereafter unless authorised by the tribunal, pursuant to Article 25. 

The SIAC Rules 2025 take a different approach. Rule 33.5 permits a party to amend its claim or defence (including a counterclaim, cross-claim or set-off) with leave of the tribunal, and the tribunal is to grant such leave unless it considers it inappropriate to allow such amendment having regard to the timing of the request or the prejudice to the other parties or any other circumstances, and provided that the amended claim or defence does not fall outside the scope of the arbitration agreement.

Overall, the ICC Rules 2026 and the SIAC Rules 2025 address issue definition and subsequent amendments through different procedural mechanisms.

Time Limit for the Final Award

With the removal of the ToR requirement in ICC arbitrations, the ICC Rules 2026 also change how the time limit for the final award is set. Under Article 31(1) of the ICC Rules 2021, the default deadline for issuance of the final award was six months from the date of the last signature of the ToR, or from notification of the ICC Court’s approval of the ToR where a party refused to participate in drawing up or signing it, although the ICC Court could fix a different time limit based on the procedural timetable pursuant to Article 24(2). Under the new Article 34, the ICC President will fix, or subsequently extend, the time limit for rendering the final award, taking into account either: (i) the procedural timetable agreed at the CMC; or (ii) a reasoned request from the tribunal.

The SIAC Rules 2025 approach the time limit for final award from the last submission in arbitration. Under Rule 53.1, the tribunal must within 30 days of the date of submission of the last directed oral or written submission provide the parties and the SIAC Secretariat with an estimate of the time within which it proposes to submit the draft award for scrutiny. Rule 53.2 requires the tribunal to submit the draft award to the SIAC Secretariat not later than 90 days from the date of the last directed submission, unless the Registrar determines otherwise. No award may be issued until it has been approved by the Registrar as to its form (Rule 53.4). 

The approach under the ICC Rules 2026 does not provide a default timeline for the final award, with the President retaining power to fix or extend the time limit, taking into account any established procedural timetable or reasoned request from the tribunal. By comparison, the approach under the SIAC Rules 2025 combines a default timeline that runs from the last submission in arbitration. 

Correction of the Award

Article 39(1) of the ICC Rules 2026 extends the time limit for a tribunal to correct an award on its own initiative from 30 to 45 days from notification of the award by the ICC Secretariat.

Rule 54.2 of the SIAC Rules 2025 set a 30-day time limit from the date of receipt of the award for a tribunal to correct an award on its own initiative. 

Confidentiality

Article 12(8) of the ICC Rules 2026 imposes confidentiality obligations on arbitrators, requiring them to maintain the confidentiality of "all matters relating to the arbitration unless otherwise in the public domain, agreed by the parties, required by applicable law, or necessary to protect a legal right or comply with disclosure obligations". The confidentiality obligations of the ICC Court and the ICC Secretariat from the ICC Rules 2021 are retained (Article 2 of Appendix I to the ICC Rules 2026). As under the ICC Rules 2021, parties may agree their own confidentiality arrangements or seek tribunal-ordered confidentiality protections pursuant to Article 23(3) of the ICC Rules 2026.

The SIAC Rules 2025 extend default confidentiality obligations to a broad range of arbitration participants. Rule 59.1 imposes a "continuing obligation to treat all matters relating to the proceedings as confidential" on the parties, their representatives, witnesses, experts, third-party funders, any emergency arbitrator, any person appointed by a tribunal (including tribunal secretaries and tribunal-appointed experts), the SIAC Court and the SIAC Secretariat. Exceptions are permitted under Rule 59.3 for, among other things, applications to challenge or enforce the award, compliance with court orders or subpoenas, pursuit of legal rights and compliance with binding legal or regulatory requirements.

Emergency Arbitration

The ICC Rules 2026 make three notable reforms to the Emergency Arbitrator (“EA”) regime: (i) broadening standing; (ii) clarifying the investment-treaty exclusion; and (iii) introducing ex parte preliminary orders.

On standing, Article 29(5) of the ICC Rules 2021 previously limited the EA provisions to “parties that are either signatories of the arbitration agreement … or successors to such signatories”. Article 1(2)(c) of Appendix IV to the ICC Rules 2026 arguably expands the application of the EA regime, to include “any party for which the President is satisfied, based on information in the Application, that an arbitration agreement binding such party may exist”. This new inclusion recognises complex corporate structures and multi-party fact patterns common in modern international disputes. By comparison, the equivalent language under the SIAC Rules 2025 is less prescriptive, with Rule 12.1 providing that “[p]rior to the constitution of the tribunal, a party may apply for the appointment of an Emergency Arbitrator in accordance with the procedure set out in Schedule 1”.

On the investment-treaty exclusion, Article 1(3)(c) of Appendix IV to the ICC Rules 2026 now provides that EA provisions do not apply if “the arbitration agreement on which the Application is based arises from a treaty or an investment protection law”. The SIAC Rules 2025 do not contain a similar carve-out, suggesting that the emergency relief procedure under the SIAC Rules 2025 is, in principle, not barred in investment treaty arbitrations.

On preliminary orders, Article 7(1) of Appendix IV to the ICC Rules 2026 provides that at any stage of the EA proceedings, a party may “request a preliminary order directing another party not to frustrate the purpose of the Application … Such request may be made and decided upon without notice to all other parties”. If a preliminary order is granted, the emergency arbitrator “must immediately afford all other parties the reasonable opportunity to present their case” and retains the power to modify the preliminary order (Article 7(4) of Appendix IV).

The SIAC Rules 2025 contain a comparable mechanism in the form of protective preliminary orders. Paragraphs 25 to 34 of Schedule 1 to the SIAC Rules 2025 allow a party to file an ex parte application for a protective preliminary order directing another party not to frustrate the purpose of the emergency interim or conservatory measure requested. Similar safeguards apply, with paragraph 31 of Schedule 1 providing that the emergency arbitrator “shall provide an opportunity to any party against whom a protective preliminary order is directed to present its case at the earliest practicable time”.

Expedited and Highly Expedited Procedures

With the introduction of the new Highly Expedited Arbitration Procedure ("HEAP") in Appendix VI, the ICC Rules 2026 now offer a two-tier expedited structure. 

Under the ICC framework, the first tier is the Expedited Procedure Provisions ("EPP"), which apply by default to arbitration agreements concluded on or after 1 June 2026 if the amount in dispute does not exceed USD 4 million, or if the parties have agreed to their application (Articles 1(2) and 1(3) of Appendix V). The EPP require the final award to be rendered within six months of the initial CMC (Article 4 of Appendix V). The second tier is the HEAP, which operates purely on an opt-in basis with no monetary threshold and requires the issuance of the final award within three months of the initial CMC. All HEAP cases are decided by a sole arbitrator. The claimant’s request for arbitration must include the statement of claim, and to the extent possible, the evidence relied upon. The respondent’s answer must include the statement of defence and, to the extent possible, the evidence relied on. Joinder and consolidation applications are prohibited, and the tribunal may, after consulting the parties, decide the dispute solely on the basis of the documents submitted, with no hearing and no examination of witnesses or experts. The parties may also agree to an unreasoned award. 

The SIAC Rules 2025 also provide a tiered framework, which can be applicable to disputes differentiated by, among other things, defined monetary thresholds. At the lower end, the procedure under Rule 13 (read with Schedule 2) (the "Streamlined Procedure") applies to arbitrations where the parties have agreed to its application before the tribunal is constituted, or by default where the amount in dispute does not exceed the equivalent of SGD 1 million. The Streamlined Procedure requires all cases to be decided by a sole arbitrator, with a final award rendered within three months of the tribunal's constitution. Unless the tribunal determines otherwise, proceedings under the Streamlined Procedure are decided solely on the basis of written submissions and accompanying documentary evidence, with no document production, no witness or expert evidence and no hearing. At the next tier, the procedure under Rule 14 (read with Schedule 3) (the "Expedited Procedure") applies where the parties have agreed to its application before the tribunal is constituted, or on application where the amount in dispute does not exceed the equivalent of SGD 10 million but exceeds the equivalent amount of SGD 1 million, or where the circumstances otherwise warrant it. The Expedited Procedure provides for a sole arbitrator (unless the SIAC President determines otherwise), with the final award due within six months of the tribunal's constitution.

The ICC’s HEAP and the SIAC’s Streamlined Procedure both provide a three-month procedure for expedited proceedings. It is useful to note, however, that the ICC’s HEAP provides for the issuance of a final award within three months of the initial CMC, and Article 26 further provides that the CMC must be held within 30 days from the tribunal receiving the file, while the SIAC’s Streamlined Procedure provides for the issuance of a final award within three months of the tribunal's constitution. As a result and for practical purposes, the actual time taken for the resolution of a dispute under each three-month procedure will likely differ, following the different computations of time adopted under each regime. Apart from this, both sets of rules permit the parties to agree to an unreasoned award. Furthermore, in the absence of contrary direction by the tribunal, proceedings under the HEAP and the Streamlined Procedure can be decided solely on the basis of written submissions and documentary evidence, with no document production, no witness evidence and no hearing. However, while the Streamlined Procedure applies by default to claims up to the equivalent of SGD 1 million, the HEAP operates purely on an opt-in basis without a monetary cap. Furthermore, the HEAP prohibits joinder and consolidation, whereas the Streamlined Procedure does not.

Conclusion

The ICC Rules 2026 update the ICC Rules 2021 by removing mandatory ToR, revising the way the time limit for the final award is fixed, extending the time limit for a tribunal to correct an award, introducing an express confidentiality obligation for arbitrators, expanding the EA framework and adding the new HEAP, among others. Parties should consider how each set of rules would operate in the context of their particular dispute, including the value of the claim, the desired pace of proceedings and the importance of particular procedural features.