ICC Report on Expedited Procedure Provisions
Introduction
On 29 January 2026, the International Chamber of Commerce’s (“ICC”) has published a report on expedited procedure provisions (“Report”)[1].
The Report is prepared by a Task Force established within the ICC’s Commission on Arbitration and ADR. The Report compiles the lessons learned and practical experience gained from nearly 800 expedited procedures, with a view to providing guidance on expedited arbitration.
The Report contains a note, a toolkit and a factsheet, which includes statistical overview of cases administered between 2017 and 2024.
Key Take-Aways
The Expedited Procedure Provisions (“EPP”) entered into force on 1 March 2017. According to Article 30 of the ICC arbitration rules, the EPP apply if (a) the amount in dispute does not exceed the limit set out in Article 1(2) of Appendix VI at the time of the communication referred to in Article 1(3) of that Appendix or (b) the parties agree so.
At the time of its entry, the EPP applied by default to all disputes where the amount in dispute did not exceed US$2 million, provided that the arbitration agreement was signed on or after 1 March 2017. Following an amendment in 2021, this threshold was increased to US$3 million and applied where the arbitration agreement was signed on or after 1 January 2021.
From its introduction through 2024, a total of 865 cases were administered under the EPP, of which 461 resulted in a final award. Of the total cases administered, 127 were initiated pursuant to party agreement, which demonstrates the growing confidence of users in the efficacy of the EPP.
Of the cases that resulted in a final award, only 96 involved a document production phase, while the remaining 365 did not. Expert reports were submitted in only 26 cases. A hearing took place in 251 cases, lasting between one and four days, of which 159 were conducted remotely or in a hybrid format. Post-hearing briefs were submitted in only 139 of those 251 cases[2]. It is also important to note that, awards were delivered on time.
The Report also addresses scope and applicability of the EPP, arbitral tribunal appointed under EPP; procedural features, awards, costs and fees, and interim measures, each in a dedicated section. This newsletter will set out a brief summary related to these topics:
Scope and Applicability
The framework governing the applicability of the EPP under the ICC Rules is set out above.
Since the introduction of the EPP, 16% of all expedited procedures were opt-in cases, while parties opted out in only 31 cases between 2017 and 2024[3]. Of the 26 cases referred to the ICC Court to determine whether the EPP should continue to apply, the ICC Court decided that the EPP should no longer apply in 17 cases (65%) and should continue to apply in nine cases (35%)[4]. Considering the safety mechanism enshrined in the EPP and the discretion granted to the ICC Court, the Report recommends that parties give serious consideration to opting into EPP, noting that there is no need to opt out unless there are compelling circumstances against an expedited process[5].
Arbitral Tribunal
At the time of the introduction of the EPP, a frequently raised question concerned the power of the ICC Court to appoint a sole arbitrator where the arbitration agreement provides for a three-member tribunal. However, there is a clear provision in the ICC Rules which foresees that the ICC Court may, notwithstanding any contrary provision of the arbitration agreement, appoint a sole arbitrator[6].
According to the Report, the ICC Court has appointed a sole arbitrator notwithstanding a provision in the arbitration agreement providing for a three-member tribunal in 61 cases, while a three-member tribunal was appointed in only 37 expedited procedures[7]. The Report notes that the time between submission of a request for arbitration and transmission of the file to the appointed tribunal may take up to three months[8]. Given the six-month time limit for rendering final awards, this period is long and the Report provides recommendations on how to shorten this timeframe[9].
Finally, as regards challenges against arbitrators, these have occurred infrequently, arising in only 12 instances (1.4% of cases)[10].
Procedural Features
Article 3 of Appendix VI of the ICC Rules grants the tribunal considerable discretion to adopt appropriate procedural measures for EPP, in consultation with the parties, and sets out specific procedural issues raised by expedited procedures[11].
Compared to non-expedited procedures, expedited procedures allow for a more proactive approach and greater control over the proceedings, which is generally accepted by the parties and counsel involved[12]. Key features include: the exclusion of Terms of Reference[13]; a higher threshold for authorising new claims compared to non-expedited proceedings[14]; a mandatory CMC within 15 days of transmission of the file, which triggers the six-month time limit[15]; the infrequent use of document production, which was absent in 79% of cases[16]; and hearings, which were held in 251 of 461 cases (54.4%), with the remaining 210 cases (46%) decided on documents alone[17].
Awards
According to Article 4 of Appendix VI of the ICC Rules, the EPP tribunal is required to render its award no later than six months after the CMC. Of the 461 final awards approved by the ICC Court, 63% were rendered on or around the stipulated deadline, and ICC Court scrutiny was completed on average within 15 days[18]. Moreover, delays in the issuance of an award were significant enough to warrant a reduction of the arbitrator’s fees in only 33 out of 461 cases, further underscoring the overall timeliness of the EPP[19].
Costs and Fees
Costs under the EPP are governed by the same framework as non-expedited proceedings, with one notable exception: arbitral tribunal fees are reduced by 20%[20]. A review of awards issued in 2022 demonstrated that in 87% of EPP cases, the tribunal adopted a “costs follow the event” approach as a starting point; while in 54% of cases, no reimbursement of costs was granted[21]. In the absence of a uniform approach to the allocation of costs, the Report recommends that parties and tribunals address their expectations regarding cost-allocation principles at an early stage of the proceedings, for example at the CMC[22].
Interim Measures
Article 28 of the ICC Rules grants arbitral tribunals the power to issue interim measures, including in expedited procedures; however, their use in EPP cases has to date been limited. Of the 74 cases administered under the EPP that resulted in a final award in 2022, only two involved interim measures. It remains unknown, however, whether the parties to those proceedings sought interim relief before national courts[23].
The Report underlines that interim measures ought to remain available in expedited procedures, as restricting them would likely push parties towards national courts, which is undesirable and contradicts with the simplification objective of the EPP. The Report further notes that an EPP tribunal may in fact be better placed to fashion appropriate relief tied to the six-month timeline.
Conclusion
Given that the findings demonstrate the strong performance of EPP and high levels of user satisfaction, the Report recommends that parties give due consideration to opting into EPP, irrespective of the value of the dispute.
- Please see: Expedited Procedure Provisions – Eight Years On
- ICC Report, page 9-10.
- ICC Report, paras 36 and 40.
- ICC Report, para 37.
- ICC Report, para 40.
- Article 2(1) of Appendix VI of the ICC Rules.
- ICC Report, para 55.
- ICC Report, para 57.
- ICC Report, paras 57 and 58.
- ICC Report, para 59.
- ICC Report, para 63.
- ICC Report, para 64.
- ICC Report, para 68.
- ICC Report, para 76.
- ICC Report, para 78.
- ICC Report, para 84.
- ICC Report, para 94.
- ICC Report, para 106.
- ICC Report, para 22.
- ICC Report, para 120.
- ICC Report, para 126.
- ICC Report, para 129.
- ICC Report, para 132.
All rights of this article are reserved. This article may not be used, reproduced, copied, published, distributed, or otherwise disseminated without quotation or Erdem & Erdem Law Firm's written consent. Any content created without citing the resource or Erdem & Erdem Law Firm’s written consent is regularly tracked, and legal action will be taken in case of violation.
Other Contents
Emergency arbitration addresses the need for interim protection before the arbitral tribunal is constituted in institutional arbitrations. Arbitral institutions establish short timeframes to ensure parties can obtain interim relief quickly. For example, the International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) requires that the emergency...
International arbitration remains the preferred mechanism for resolving complex cross-border disputes. Yet despite its advantages—neutrality, enforceability, flexibility—arbitration is frequently criticized for being too slow, too expensive, and too procedurally heavy. Often, parties proceed through hearings and...
For arbitral awards rendered in international commercial arbitration to produce legal effects in foreign jurisdictions, they must be subjected to proceedings for “recognition” and “enforcement.” This process is governed by the New York Convention as well as by the provisions of the Law on Private International Law...
Arbitrability, the determination of whether a specific subject matter can be resolved through arbitration, constitutes a fundamental aspect of arbitration within the scope of international commercial dispute resolution. This concept draws a delicate balance between party autonomy—a fundamental principle of arbitration...
The recognition, enforcement, and annulment of foreign court and arbitral awards in Türkiye are processes in which public policy emerges as one of the most critical criteria for review, both in theory and in practice. The Court of Cassation decisions determine the direction of case law regarding the scope and...
As is well known, the action for annulment of objection is a special type of lawsuit regulated under Article 67 of the Turkish Execution and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004 (“EBL”). The primary objective of this action is to nullify a debtor’s objection to execution proceedings. Despite its procedural function of facilitating...
On 16 December 2024, the London Court of International Arbitration (“LCIA”) released its third batch of challenge decisions covering the period from 22 July 2017 to 31 December 2022. The LCIA has also issued a detailed commentary that identifies key legal themes and analytical trends, offering practitioners...
The International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) has published its report on the dispute resolution statistics for 2023 (“Report”) , shedding light on the evolving landscape of international arbitration...
Syndicated loans undoubtedly hold a significant position among global financing models. In 2023 alone, 3,655 syndicated loans were provided to companies in the US, with their total value reaching USD 2.4 trillion...
Preliminary attachment refers to the temporary seizure of a debtor's assets to secure a creditor's claim. While it serves as a vital instrument for safeguarding the rights of creditors, it is subject to specific and stringent conditions under Turkish law to prevent any potential misuse...
One of the most important reasons for parties to choose arbitration is the opportunity to freely choose their arbitrators. This freedom granted to the parties also distinguishes arbitration from proceedings before state courts, where the parties are deprived of the power to determine the judges who will conduct the...
The 6th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation ruled on October 12, 2022, that national courts have jurisdiction over objections to provisional measures in international arbitration disputes...
The declaration of intent to resolve disputes through arbitration is the fundamental constituent element of an arbitration agreement. To speak of a valid arbitration agreement, the parties' intention to arbitrate must emerge in a way that leaves no room for dispute...
In the wake of the evolving dynamics of commercial transactions, the Netherlands Arbitration Institute Foundation (NAI) announced new arbitration rules . 2024 NAI Arbitration Rules are in force as of 1 March 2024 and will be applicable on proceedings filed on or after this date...
With the global shift to online activities, domain names play a crucial role in identifying businesses. It is more common than ever for a domain name to be registered that is confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark...
The ICC Commission on Arbitration and ADR (“Commission”) published a new guide and report with the aim to increase awareness on alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) mechanisms to prevent disputes and strengthen the relationship between all stakeholders.The Guide on Effective Conflict Management...
Mergers and Acquisitions (“M&A”) are restructuring of companies or assets through various types of financial transactions, such as mergers, acquisitions, purchase of assets, or management acquisitions. This Newsletter article covers M&A disputes being solved before arbitral tribunals.
In the context of arbitration practice, the principle of revision au fond means that the courts can not examine the merits of a dispute when reviewing an arbitral award. This principle is most commonly encountered in set aside and enforcement proceedings. An arbitral award is evidence of the parties’ willingness...
Under Turkish law, parties may agree on the settlement of disputes that have arisen or may arise, regarding the rights that they can freely dispose of, by arbitration. However, disputes which are not subject to the will of parties, such as the disputes relating to in rem rights of immovables, bankruptcy law...
On 4 September 2020, a research project “Does a Right to a Physical Hearing Exist in International Arbitration?” was launched by an International Council for Commercial Arbitration (“ICCA”) taskforce. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, many arbitration hearings were held online. Many institutional rules...
Dubai International Arbitration Center amended its Arbitration Rules on 25 February 2022. The 2022 Arbitration Rules were published on 2 March 2022 and came into effect on 21 March 2022. The Rules will be applied to arbitrations that are filed after 21 March 2022; unless parties agree otherwise...
In the aftermath of the Achmea decision, controversies on intra-EU arbitrations continue. Most recently, the Paris Court of Appeal has annulled two arbitral awards rendered against Poland. Meanwhile, the Higher Regional Court of Berlin has refused to declare that an Irish investor’s ICSID claim...
Under Turkish law, the legal remedy that can be applied against arbitral awards is an annulment action. Law on International Arbitration No. 4686 (“IAL”) finds its application area in arbitration proceedings where Turkey is the place of arbitration...
It is well known that following a decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union, problems arose related to arbitration of intra-EU disputes, and particularly arbitration under the Energy Charter Treaty...
Arbitration in corporate law contains controversial elements in many respects, especially the issue of arbitrability. Even in legal systems where these disputes are considered to be arbitrable, uncertainties remain on whether an arbitration clause can be included in the articles of...
Arbitration has benifited from a great increase in the use of technology which has directly effected the conduct of proceedings. More particularly, with digitalization, the way that we conduct arbitration proceedings has been changed to reflect the current needs of parties, with an aim of increasing time...