The International Chamber of Commerce's revised Rules of Arbitration entered into force on 1 June 2026. Some of the changes are immediately visible: a new highly expedited procedure, a higher financial threshold for the existing expedited procedure, and an express mechanism for early determination. Others are less prominent but may prove equally important in practice, particularly the removal of mandatory Terms of Reference and the revised disclosure and emergency arbitrator provisions.
For parties to contracts connected with Jordan, the first point is not simply that a new edition of the Rules exists. It is understanding which provisions would apply to a particular contract and what choices remain open to the parties.
Which version of the Rules applies?
The 2026 Rules apply to ICC arbitrations commenced on or after 1 June 2026, unless the parties agreed to submit to a version of the Rules in force on an earlier date.
This means that an arbitration clause signed before June 2026 may still lead to an arbitration governed by the 2026 Rules if the arbitration itself begins after that date. The exception is narrower than it may first appear.
It is not enough that the clause was concluded while an earlier edition was in force; the parties must have agreed to submit to the Rules in effect on an earlier date. A clause that simply refers to the ICC Rules without more will not preserve the previous edition.
There is, however, a separate date question under the Expedited Procedure Provisions: the applicable monetary threshold depends on when the arbitration agreement was concluded.
That distinction is easy to overlook. The date on which the arbitration begins ordinarily determines the edition of the Rules, while the date of the arbitration agreement determines the relevant threshold for automatic expedited treatment.
The expedited procedure now reaches more disputes
The ICC Expedited Procedure Provisions, commonly referred to as EPP, provide a streamlined process that ordinarily involves a sole arbitrator and a final award within six months of the initial case management conference, subject to any extension permitted under the Rules.
Under the 2026 Rules, the date-based thresholds are:
| Date of the arbitration agreement | Threshold for automatic EPP application |
|---|---|
| Before 1 March 2017 | No automatic application under the date-based threshold |
| From 1 March 2017 to 31 December 2020 | USD 2 million |
| From 1 January 2021 to 31 May 2026 | USD 3 million |
| On or after 1 June 2026 | USD 4 million |
The calculation concerns the amount in dispute, not only the claimant's initial claim. Automatic application is also subject to the other conditions in Appendix V. The parties may opt out, and the ICC Court may determine that the expedited procedure is inappropriate in the circumstances. Parties may also agree to use the procedure where it would not otherwise apply automatically.
The practical consequence is that more mid-value disputes arising under newly concluded clauses may enter the expedited procedure without a further agreement after the dispute arises. Contracting parties should therefore decide at the drafting stage whether that result is suitable for the type of transaction concerned.
A separate three-month procedure, but only by agreement
The new Highly Expedited Arbitration Provisions, or HEAP, are different from EPP. They do not apply automatically and are not tied to the amount in dispute. All parties must agree to use them, either in the arbitration agreement or after a dispute has arisen.
HEAP is designed around a sole arbitrator and front-loaded submissions. The claimant files its statement of claim with the request for arbitration, and the respondent submits its statement of defence with the answer. The initial case management conference should be held within seven days after the arbitrator receives the file.
The time limit for the final award is three months from that initial conference. It is not three months from filing the request for arbitration, and the President may extend the period where the requirements of the Rules are met. The parties may also agree that the award will not state reasons.
Speed therefore comes with procedural choices that should be considered carefully. HEAP is not intended for procedurally complex disputes, and joinder and consolidation are unavailable within the procedure. A HEAP clause should not be inserted mechanically into a multi-party or multi-contract transaction simply because a shorter timetable appears attractive.
An agreement to dispense with reasons also requires particular care. The parties should consider the law of the seat, the nature of the dispute and where enforcement may eventually be sought before adopting that option.
Terms of Reference are no longer mandatory
The Terms of Reference were a familiar feature of ordinary ICC arbitration under previous editions of the Rules. The 2026 Rules no longer require them as a mandatory step, although the arbitral tribunal retains discretion to establish Terms of Reference where they would be useful.
The initial case management conference now carries greater weight. In an ordinary ICC arbitration, it must be held within 30 days after the tribunal receives the file, subject to an extension under the Rules. The tribunal establishes the procedural timetable at that conference or as soon as possible afterwards.
There is also a practical pleading consequence. Once the initial case management conference has taken place, a party may not introduce a new claim without the tribunal's authorisation. The tribunal will consider the nature of the proposed claim, the stage of the arbitration, the cost implications and any other relevant circumstances.
Parties should therefore avoid treating the request for arbitration or the answer and counterclaim as merely preliminary documents. Claims and relief should be identified with sufficient care before the first case management conference.
Early determination is now stated in the Rules
Article 30 allows a party to ask for early determination of one or more claims or defences on either of two grounds: that they are manifestly without merit, or that they are manifestly outside the tribunal's jurisdiction.
The application does not proceed automatically. The tribunal decides whether to allow it and, if it does, determines the appropriate procedure after consulting the parties. The responding party must have a reasonable opportunity to answer the application.
Early determination may be useful where a discrete legal issue can be resolved without a full evidentiary process. It should not be treated as an invitation to add a summary phase to every case. An unfocused application may increase the time and cost it was intended to save.
Disclosure obligations require closer attention
The 2026 Rules place greater emphasis on identifying circumstances relevant to an arbitrator's independence and impartiality.
A prospective arbitrator must resolve doubts about whether to disclose a matter in favour of disclosure. At the same time, the Rules clarify that disclosure alone does not establish a lack of independence or impartiality.
The parties have related obligations. When filing specified initial submissions, each party must provide the Secretariat with a list of persons and entities that it believes the prospective arbitrators and arbitrators should consider, together with the reasons. A party must also promptly disclose the existence and identity of any non-party that has entered into an arrangement to fund claims or defences and has an economic interest in the outcome.
The rule does not, by its terms, require automatic disclosure of the amount advanced, the commercial terms of the funding arrangement or the value of the funder's economic interest. Further disclosure questions may nevertheless arise under an order of the tribunal or the applicable law.
Emergency relief has been expanded
Emergency arbitrator proceedings remain available for urgent interim or conservatory measures that cannot await the constitution of the tribunal. The 2026 provisions may apply against a signatory to the arbitration agreement, its successor, or another party where the President is satisfied, on the information in the application, that an arbitration agreement binding that party may exist.
That determination is made on the information in the application and does not settle jurisdiction. The emergency arbitrator must still determine whether it has jurisdiction to order emergency measures, and the arbitral tribunal is not bound by the emergency arbitrator's findings or reasons.
The revised provisions also introduce a preliminary order that may be requested and decided without prior notice to all other parties. Its purpose is narrow: it may direct another party not to frustrate the purpose of the emergency application. Once the emergency arbitrator has decided the request, the Secretariat transmits the application and request to the other parties. If the preliminary order is granted, the emergency arbitrator must immediately afford all other parties a reasonable opportunity to present their case, and may modify the order.
The mechanism should therefore be distinguished from a general power to grant any form of interim relief without notice. Whether and how a preliminary order may receive support or enforcement outside the ICC process will depend on the applicable national law, including the law of the seat and the law of any court asked to act.
Electronic communication is now the default
Written communications with the ICC Secretariat are to be made electronically by default. Hard copies of the request, answer or request for joinder are submitted only where the filing party requests transmission by one of the physical methods specified in the Rules or electronic transmission is not practicable.
The revision reflects current practice, but parties should still ensure that their notices provisions, internal document controls and authorised contact details are consistent with an electronically administered proceeding.
The Jordanian connection
The ICC Rules govern the institutional administration and procedure of an ICC arbitration. They do not replace the law of the seat, determine the law governing the arbitration agreement or guarantee that an eventual award will be enforced in a particular jurisdiction.
Four separate legal questions should be kept distinct:
| Layer | What it principally determines |
|---|---|
| ICC Rules | The institutional administration of the case and the procedure before the arbitral tribunal |
| Seat of arbitration | The juridical home of the arbitration, the national arbitration law and the courts with supervisory functions |
| Law applicable to the merits | The substantive rights and obligations in dispute |
| Place of recognition or enforcement | The treaty and domestic-law requirements applied where enforcement is sought, often where relevant assets are located |
The structure of the 2026 Rules reflects these distinctions. Article 19 addresses the place of arbitration, Article 20 the rules governing the proceedings and Article 22 the rules of law applicable to the merits.
Where Jordan is chosen as the seat, Jordanian Arbitration Law No. 31 of 2001, as amended, will ordinarily form the procedural legal framework alongside the chosen institutional rules, subject to any mandatory provisions of Jordanian law. Where the seat is outside Jordan, Jordanian law may still be relevant if it governs the contract or if recognition or enforcement is sought against assets in Jordan.
UNCITRAL records Jordanian arbitration legislation as legislation based on or influenced by the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. That classification does not mean that the Jordanian legislation is identical to the Model Law. Jordan is also a party to the 1958 New York Convention, which entered into force for Jordan on 13 February 1980.
Those points do not remove the need for a case-specific enforcement analysis. Arbitrability, due process, the scope and validity of the arbitration agreement, the law of the seat, the applicable treaty framework and public policy may all affect the position.
What this means for your ICC arbitration clause
For contracts with a Jordanian connection, the 2026 Rules make it sensible to revisit four matters before signature: which edition of the Rules is intended to apply, whether automatic EPP treatment is appropriate, whether HEAP should be available, and whether the seat, language, number of arbitrators and governing-law provisions work together as a coherent clause.
A short arbitration clause can determine the course of a dispute years later. The best time to test those choices is while the contract is being drafted, not after the relationship has broken down.
This publication provides general information as at 25 July 2026. It does not constitute legal advice. The application of the ICC Rules and the validity or enforceability of an arbitration agreement or award depend on the wording of the agreement, the law of the seat, other applicable laws and the circumstances of the particular matter.
Primary references
- ICC 2026 Arbitration Rules
- ICC: Expedited Procedure Provisions and Emergency Arbitration
- ICC: Highly Expedited Arbitration Provisions
- ICC: Moving beyond mandatory Terms of Reference
- ICC: Early determination
- ICC: Arbitrator disclosure
- ICC: Written communications, time limits for awards and confidentiality
- UNCITRAL: Status of the Model Law
- UNCITRAL: Status of the New York Convention
