Joint ICC Arbitration Day

Key Takeaways

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE “MOST COURAGEOUS AND FORWARD-THINKING” JOINT ICC EVENT TO DATE

Hosted by ICC Belgium, ICC France, ICC Netherlands and ICC Germany, the Joint ICC Arbitration Day brought together private practitioners, in house counsel and ICC Court members for a brisk tour of where international arbitration stands—and where it is headed. From upbeat opening remarks to candid in house perspectives, the day balanced data, doctrine and practicalities with a clear European focus.

Setting the tone

WELCOME BY NATIONAL COMMITTEE CHAIRS

After some kind words of introduction from Marco Schoups, the Chairs from the four ICC National Committees (Yves Herinckx, Marnix Leijten, Clément Fouchard and Glenn Baumgarten) framed the day with energy and humor. Belgium’s great 2025 vintage of Supreme Court decisions set the tone, the Netherlands teased a “hostile takeover” of ICC Belgium, and Germany highlighted its centenary and the (applauded) growing presence of in house counsel.

The cross border and cross disciplinary attendance underscored the event’s aim: convening diverse voices with a shared interest in arbitration.

ICC by the numbers

AS LITTLE STATISTICS AS POSSIBLE BUT WHAT’S NEXT

In a forward looking keynote, ICC Court Secretary General Alexander Fessas highlighted that the ICC is on the verge of registering its 30,000th case, with around 1,800 matters currently pending. The caseload spans the spectrum—large and small, standard and expedited—yet remains anchored in Europe, with half of seats located there and Paris retaining a notable role.

Several strategic commitments stood out. Rules are now being revised more regularly, with a new iteration targeted by 1 June 2026. Further investment in Case Connect is planned for 2026, and a new Paris hearing centre complements ICC’s recognition as a most preferred institution in recent surveys. On technology, the message was pragmatic: the time for AI will come, but not without transparency and guidance. An ICC Task Force is already examining AI use by arbitrators.

Inside the ICC Court

SCRUTINY, CONFLICTS AND MODERNISATION

A panel of ICC Court members (Rolf Trittmann, Dirk De Meulemeester, Marieke van Hooijdonk and Julien Fouret), moderated by Françoise Lefèvre, lifted the curtain on how the Court operates.

With 172 Court members, 19 Vice Presidents and one President, the Court oversees the nomination, challenge and replacement of arbitrators, scrutinizes awards and sets fees. Its scrutiny aims squarely at enforceability, and participants noted that more draft awards are being sent back for improvement—evidence of a rigorous process. Geopolitics has had limited operational impact, though sensitivities do arise, including Russian anti suit dynamics and limits on the participation of certain national Court members in specific cases.

Penetration beyond Western Europe continues to deepen, with China’s evolving law and practice pointing to greater openness. On conflicts, the Court’s approach is deliberately robust. Challenges remain relatively low (33 in 2024, with 7 upheld), and approximately 25 non confirmations occurred.

We also received insights on the most striking upcoming rule change summarized as “the Terms of Reference are dead”. Expect also a wholesale move away from hard copies, electronic signatures for awards, tighter disclosure requirements and a gradual rise in the threshold for expedited proceedings, with 4 million flagged for new cases.

Arbitration in a changing world

THE BROADER PERSPECTIVE FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Stephanie Leupold, Head of legal affairs and dispute settlement at DG Trade of the European Commission situated arbitration within a recalibrating global economy. Policy has moved from pure efficiency to economic security, supply chain resilience and strategic autonomy.

She underscored the continued need for credible enforcement architecture: while the WTO’s appellate layer remains stalled, the multi-party interim appeal arrangement has attracted broad participation and is serving its purpose. Legal practitioners, arbitrators and academics, she stressed, remain central to a rules based trading order. Remarks also touched on evolving sanctions policy and its implications for recognition and enforcement.

In house counsel priorities

PRAGMATISM, SECURITY AND VALUE

Corporate counsel Glenn Baumgarten and Cyril Dumoulin, under control of moderator Julie Otjacques, brought a grounded view from the front lines.

They support arbitration, but a “horses for courses” approach prevails: ICC arbitration is preferred, but region specific arbitration and state courts have their place. Data protection and security are now venue selection factors, with predictable regimes prized.

On technology, digitalization is here to stay, and AI is being embraced—cautiously. Failing to engage with AI risks becoming a stranger in your own team. The upshot for external counsel is clear: leverage tools responsibly, deliver cost efficiency and maintain human oversight. There was strong appetite for an institution managed, secure case platform to streamline filings and even tools to facilitate document production and preliminary assessments.

On costs and outcomes, the message was pragmatic: arbitrators who manage proceedings efficiently—and who help parties find settlement when sensible—are valued. Try living by the benchmark: “is it legal, ethical and wise”.

Mediation drew mixed views: although promising in principle, it may be harder to sell internally without predictability, though some urged a broader definition of “winning” that includes commercially optimal outcomes. A seasonal tip from finance minded participants: avoid issuing awards just before year end closes.

We closed the first part of the day with remarks from Arnaud Nuyts, who noted that in an increasingly complex and unpredictable world, arbitration has a vital role to play—reminding us that order, reason, and dialogue still matter.

The rest of the evening…

FURTHER REFLECTION AT THE MERODE

(The author also extends a warm thank you to the other member of the Belgian party committee, Julie Deré and Guillaume Croisant).

Lauren Rasking

Counsel

A&O Shearman