The International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) is one of the world’s leading arbitration institutes and its Rules of Arbitration will be well known to many of us. But from 1 June 2026 the new “2026 ICC Rules” will come into force. This article highlights some of the key changes.

The International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) is one of the world’s leading arbitration institutes and its Rules of Arbitration will be well known to many of us. But from 1 June 2026 the new “2026 ICC Rules” will come into force. This article highlights some of the key changes.

1. Terms of Reference

Terms of Reference will no longer be a mandatory step in ICC proceedings, although Tribunals will retain the discretion to utilise them as a useful case management tool where appropriate.

Terms of Reference have historically been unique to the ICC as a formal step, serving the following functions (i) confirming the parties’ consent to arbitrate (ii) recording key procedural agreements and (iii) defining the scope of the dispute including a list of issues to be determined.

Whilst Terms of Reference often encouraged parties to align on procedural matters at a very early stage, the Case Management Conference (CMC) will now be the “central procedural milestone for structuring the proceedings and ensuring efficiency from the outset”. CMCs must be held within 30 days of the transmission of the file to the Tribunal per Article 24, so early case management remains a priority.

It was also found that in practice Tribunals and parties were becoming reluctant to set out a detailed list of issues at such an early stage of the proceedings. Relaxing this requirement at the outset will allow for greater flexibility as the case develops – flexibility having always been one of the advantages of arbitration as a forum for disputes.

This seems to be a sensible move away from a requirement that had become more formalistic than beneficial.

2. Disclosures

The independence and impartiality of arbitrators is a cornerstone of the arbitration process. The ICC Rules have long maintained that prospective arbitrators are required to “disclose in writing to the Secretariat any facts or circumstances which might be of such a nature as to call into question the arbitrator’s independence in the eyes of the parties, as well as any circumstances that could give rise to reasonable doubts as to the arbitrator’s impartiality”, and that obligation remains in the 2026 ICC Rules.

The new additions to the Rules are:

• Article 12(2): The expectation that “Any doubts the prospective arbitrator may have about whether to make a disclosure shall be resolved in favour of disclosure”.
• Article 12(4): That a “disclosure does not, by itself, establish a lack of independence or impartiality”.
• Article 12(5): “To assist prospective arbitrators and arbitrators in complying with their disclosure obligations, at the time of filing their respective Request, Answer, Request for Joinder, Answer to a Request for Joinder or request for an extension of time for submitting an Answer under Article 6(2), each party must submit to the Secretariat a list of persons and entities which they believe the prospective arbitrators and arbitrators should consider and the reasons thereof”.

The first two principles had previously been incorporated within the Note to Parties and Arbitral Tribunals on the Conduct of the Arbitration (“Note”) but have now been elevated to the Rules themselves to clarify the ICC’s expectations and encourage robust disclosures whilst reassuring potential arbitrators that disclosure alone should not be understood as an admission of conflict. Proactive party input pursuant to Article 12(5) is a new feature.

3. Expedited and Highly Expedited Procedures

The ICC Expedited Procedure remains the same, save that the money threshold for the automatic application of the Expedited Procedure has been increased to $4 million if the applicable arbitration agreement was concluded on or after 1 June 2026.

The ICC 2026 Rules also introduces Highly Expedited Arbitration Provisions (“HEAP”). The value of the claim is not the determining factor as to whether HEAP is appropriate, but rather the complexity of the dispute (HEAP being most suitable for lower-complexity claims or those with a simple factual matrix).

HEAP applies on an opt-in basis, and parties can opt-in either when drafting their arbitration agreement or by agreement after a dispute has arisen. The ICC Secretariat can provide guidance to parties considering whether HEAP is appropriate.

The key features of HEAP are:

• Sole arbitrator.
• 20 days (rather than 30) to nominate the sole arbitrator.
• Statement of Claim must be filed with the Request for Arbitration; Statement of Defence must be filed with the Answer.
• Parties encouraged to submit evidence at an early stage.
• CMC to take place within 7 days of the sole arbitrator’s receipt of the files.
• Tighter limits on extension requests.
• Time limit for the award is 3 months from the initial CMC.
• Parties may agree to have an award without reasons.

This provides a faster and proportionate route for less complex disputes, and it is anticipated it will primarily be adopted in claims where speed is commercially critical (e.g. theft of cryptocurrency).

4. Early Determination now in the Rules

Another instance of elevation from the Note to the Rules is early determination, which has long formed part of the ICC arbitral process. The core provisions can now be found in Article 30 of the ICC 2026 Rules.

As yet another procedure designed for promoting efficiency, the parties are expected to make any applications for early determination promptly following the Statements of Claim/Defence being filed. The Tribunal is also expected to decide on such applications promptly, and retains broad discretion as to whether such applications should be permitted to proceed.

5. Written Communications

Article 3(1) of the ICC 2026 Rules provide that (save in limited circumstances) all written communications are to be made by electronic means, unless a party requests delivery of hardcopies. This change to the rules formalises what had already become common practice.

6. Time limit for the final award

Article 34 of the ICC 2026 Rules provides that the President of the ICC Court shall fix or extend the time limit for rendering the final award on a case-by-case basis. Previously the time limit was 6 months, though often that was far surpassed. This change is intended to enhance efficiency and strengthen oversight of procedural timelines. Whether it has a practical impact on the turn-around of final awards remains to be seen.

Conclusion

The 2026 ICC Rules are the result of continued efforts to streamline and modernise the arbitration process, maintaining flexibility whilst prioritising efficiency. It is clear that close attention is paid to how arbitrations are conducted in practice and how the Rules might be adapted to reflect and accommodate those developments.