What the new ICC Rules mean for arbitrations seated in England and Wales

Increased ‘fast-track’ options: more cases to be adjudicated under the Expedited Proceedings provisions and a new Highly Expedited procedure

While the established framework for Expedited Proceedings remains unchanged in the 2026 ICC Rules, the monetary threshold for the automatic application of the Expedited Proceedings increases from US$3 million to US$4 million for claims brought under arbitration agreements concluded on or after 1 June 2026. This change will have considerable practical implications: in 2025, over 40% of ICC cases did not exceed US$4 million, meaning that a substantially broader range of disputes will now be adjudicated under the Expedited Proceedings provisions than under the previous version of the ICC Rules, unless parties opt-out of these provisions. Parties remain free to opt-in to the Expedited Proceedings provisions, either in their arbitration agreement or when proceedings are commenced, regardless of the amount in dispute.

The 2026 ICC Rules also introduce a new Highly Expedited procedure designed for parties seeking a final award within a compressed timeframe, with awards to be rendered within three months of the initial CMC. Unlike Expedited Proceedings, there is no automatic application and no threshold amounts: the Highly Expedited procedure applies solely on an opt-in basis regardless of the amount in dispute.

For commercial parties choosing London or another seat in England and Wales, these changes may make ICC arbitration more attractive for lower value and/or less complex disputes, as well as disputes where obtaining an award quickly is critical. For more complex disputes involving expert evidence, multiple parties, state entities and/or large amounts of documents, parties should consider whether expedited or highly expedited procedures are suitable.

Preliminary orders during Emergency Arbitration proceedings expressly acknowledged

Emergency arbitration allows parties to apply for urgent interim or conservatory relief prior to the constitution of an arbitral tribunal. The 2026 ICC Rules provide that such proceedings may be initiated, not only against signatories to the arbitration agreement and their successors, but also against parties for which the President of the ICC Court is satisfied, based on information in the Application, that an arbitration agreement binding such party may exist.

For the first time, the 2026 ICC Rules expressly acknowledge preliminary orders. At any stage of emergency arbitrator proceedings, a party may request a preliminary order directing another party not to frustrate the purpose of the emergency arbitration application. Crucially, where circumstances require, such requests may now be made and decided ex parte, i.e. without notice to the other parties. Ex parte orders are useful in situations where prior notification of the application to the other party could undermine the effectiveness of the relief sought, for example preventing a respondent from dissipating assets or destroying evidence.

For arbitrations seated in England and Wales, an emergency arbitrator’s order may in appropriate circumstances be followed by an application to the English courts for a court order requiring compliance. Separately, the English courts have powers to support arbitral proceedings, including by granting interim injunctions and orders relating to evidence and property as well as the ability to grant worldwide freezing orders to prevent asset dissipation. Those powers can be particularly useful where relief is needed against a party that will not comply voluntarily, or where effective relief requires action by a third party outside the tribunal’s jurisdiction. Parties should therefore consider at the emergency stage whether their interests are likely to be better served by applying to an emergency arbitrator for an ICC preliminary order or an application to the English courts. Prior to this, parties should consider when drafting their arbitration agreements if they are likely to prefer interim relief from the English courts rather than an ICC emergency arbitrator, and if so, they should expressly disapply the emergency arbitrator provisions in the 2026 ICC Rules in their arbitration agreement.

Early case management: eliminating Terms of Reference and elevating the Case Management Conference

One notable change in the 2026 ICC Rules is that Terms of Reference (“ToR”) are no longer mandatory in ICC arbitrations, but tribunals retain discretion to prepare them where necessary. Historically, the ToR have been a distinctive feature of ICC proceedings, setting out the parties’ claims, issues and procedural framework at an early stage. Under the 2026 ICC Rules, the focus shifts towards the initial Case Management Conference (“CMC”), which must be held within 30 days of transmission of the case file to the tribunal and which now serves as the cut-off date for the parties to introduce new claims. In practice, this is likely to encourage parties to front-load their cases.

Many parties, in particular those from common law jurisdictions, such as England and Wales, may view the removal of the mandatory ToR as a welcome development that will save time at the outset of arbitration proceedings by removing unnecessary bureaucracy. From a practical perspective, the removal of mandatory ToR means that the CMC, and the Procedural Order No. 1 (“PO1”) produced at around the same time, will become more important. The ICC Secretariat is currently developing a model PO1 to assist tribunals and parties in recording key elements of the arbitration at the CMC stage, such as identification of the parties, confirmation of jurisdiction, and the applicable law; parties and their counsel should ensure they engage actively in shaping PO1 at this early juncture.

Early determination: a useful tool now codified

The 2026 ICC Rules introduce express early determination provisions, enabling tribunals to dispose of claims or defences that are manifestly without merit or manifestly outside the tribunal’s jurisdiction at an early stage and aligning the ICC with a broader trend towards early determination mechanisms in international arbitration. While the early determination provisions in Article 30 of the 2026 ICC Rules were previously included in the ICC’s Note to Parties and Arbitral Tribunals as guidance, their codification in the 2026 ICC Rules may encourage greater use of the mechanism. This may be particularly the case in arbitrations seated in England and Wales following the enactment of the Arbitration Act 2025 which introduced a new express statutory basis for tribunals to issue summary awards on application of a party when it considers that a party has “no real prospect of succeeding” on “the claim or issue” or in “the defence of the claim or issue”.

In arbitrations seated in London, early determination may be particularly attractive in disputes where discrete jurisdictional and/or preliminary legal issues can be separated from the merits, for example in arbitrations in the finance/banking sector.

Key takeaways

The 2026 ICC Rules should make ICC arbitrations seated in England and Wales more efficient and offer parties greater procedural flexibility and options, bolstering London’s continued role as a leading arbitral seat.

Clients entering new contracts should review their ICC arbitration clauses now, particularly where disputes may be complex, high value, multi-party or strategically sensitive. Parties already facing a dispute commenced on or after 1 June 2026 should prepare for a more active first phase of the arbitration, with early case management likely to shape the cost, speed and trajectory of the proceedings.

Authored by Annabel Maltby and Auriane Negret.