Introduction

Shortly after the First World War, in 1919, prominent members of the business communities of the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Belgium and Italy met to found an organization to promote world peace. These men, who referred to themselves as 'merchants of peace', believed that the more countries were intertwined through international trade and commerce, the less likely they would be to go to war. That their belief, novel at the time, is now widely shared throughout the world is credit to the institution they founded-the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). Over eighty years later, the ICC, a not-for-profit organization headquartered in Paris, continues to pursue its founders' mission and has grown to become the voice of the world business community, making the case for the global economy as a force for peace and prosperity.

One of the ways in which the ICC promotes the global economy is by supporting the development and expansion of international commercial arbitration. It is for this reason that the ICC has attached to itself an arbitral institution-the ICC International Court of Arbitration ('the ICC Court' or 'the Court'). Since its founding in 1923, the ICC Court has been at the forefront of the development of arbitration as the method of choice for resolving international business disputes, from relatively small sale-of-goods disputes to disputes concerning massive State-financed infrastructure projects. To date, the Court has handled 14,000 international arbitrations in over 100 different places of arbitration involving parties from some 180 different countries, making the Court the most experienced, prominent and respected international commercial arbitration institution in the world.

Even so, the role of the Court is not always fully understood, especially by those new to ICC arbitration. This is largely because the Court is unique to ICC arbitration-no other arbitral institution has a comparable body-and its work is strictly confidential. The purpose of this article is to explain exactly what the Court is and how it functions. This includes describing the Court's permanent staff, known collectively as the Secretariat, and explaining how the Secretariat and the Court work together in performing some of the Court's most essential functions, from fixing a budget for the arbitration and constituting the arbitral tribunal at the beginning of a case, to scrutinizing arbitral awards and deciding how much arbitrators shall be paid at the end of a case. Without claiming to be exhaustive, this article aims to give those newly acquainted with ICC arbitration a foundation for understanding the Court and its work.[Page10:]

I. What is the ICC Court?

To understand what the ICC Court is, it is necessary to put aside any ideas one may have about courts. This is because the ICC Court, despite its name, is not a court. Rather, the ICC Court is an administrative body that administers arbitrations taking place under the ICC Rules of Arbitration ('the ICC Rules').2 For example, the Court fixes a budget for each case (known as the 'advance on costs'),3 reviews the prima facie existence of arbitration agreements,4 fixes places of arbitration,5 confirms and appoints arbitrators 6 and decides challenges seeking to remove them,7 scrutinizes draft awards to help ensure their quality and enforceability,8 and decides how much arbitrators and the ICC should be paid at the end of each case (known as 'fixing the costs of arbitration').9 The Court does not make any decisions with respect to the substantive merits of the cases it oversees-i.e. who is right, who is wrong, and who has to pay what to whom. All such decisions are made exclusively by the arbitral tribunal in each case. Nor does the Court make decisions about how the arbitration should be conducted-e.g. when the parties' written submissions should be filed, whether an expert should be engaged, when hearings should be held. That too is for the arbitral tribunal.10

The Court is composed of 124 Court members, who are not judges, but arbitration specialists from 86 countries around the world. One of them serves as Chairman and nine as Vice-Chairmen. Currently, the Chairman is from Switzerland and the Vice-Chairmen are from Australia, Brazil, Egypt, France, India, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States. The diversity of the Court's members gives the Court unparalleled collective expertise. This expertise is marshalled for the benefit of the parties' proceedings, as it is these specialists who make the Court's decisions.11

Court members are appointed for renewable three-year terms by the supreme governing body of the ICC, which is known as the World Council, upon the proposal of the ICC's constituent National Committees. Court members receive only a nominal honorarium for their work in this capacity. Court members may not be appointed by the Court as arbitrators in ICC arbitrations.12 Moreover, if a Court member is involved in any way whatsoever in a case that comes before the Court, that Court member may not receive any documents related to that case or participate in the discussions or the decisions of the Court and must not be in the room whenever the case is considered.13

The sessions of the ICC Court take place at the ICC's headquarters in Paris. The Court generally meets five times a month. Each week the Court meets in what is known as a Committee Session, where only three Court members are present, with either the Chairman or one of his Vice-Chairmen presiding. These weekly Committee Sessions have been described as the 'engine room' of the ICC Court because it is not uncommon for the Court to make decisions in more than sixty cases. Indeed, it is in Committee Sessions that the Court makes nearly all required decisions, except for certain particularly important decisions that are reserved for the Court's monthly Plenary Sessions.

At the Court's Plenary Sessions, all Court members are welcome to attend. As Court members live and practise all around the world, the number who actually come to any given Plenary Session generally varies between thirty and fifty. At Plenary Sessions, the Court makes many of its most important decisions. The number of cases considered [Page11:] is far smaller than at a Committee Session, rarely more than ten.

At these sessions, the Court decides upon challenges against arbitrators and usually scrutinizes draft awards involving large amounts in dispute, State entities or complex legal questions, as well as draft awards where an arbitrator has filed a dissenting opinion. Another feature of a Plenary Session is that, for each case submitted, a Court member volunteers to serve as a reporter, who studies the case and presents a report highlighting the points and issues material to the decision the Court needs to make.

All of the Court's sessions are closed to the public and are confidential.14 Parties may not plead orally before the Court. Submissions made to the Court may only be made in writing, and the Court does not give reasons for its decisions.

II. What is the Secretariat?

The Court does not itself handle the day-to-day administration of the over 1,100 cases currently pending at the ICC. This is what the Secretariat does.

The Secretariat is located at the ICC's headquarters in Paris.15 At the head of the Secretariat is the Secretary General. Assisting the Secretary General in her duties are the Deputy Secretary General and the General Counsel. The staff of the Secretariat totals sixty people of twenty-three different nationalities who all speak English and French. In addition, together the members of the Secretariat master seventeen other languages, including Arabic, Chinese, Dutch, German, Greek, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish.

Within the Secretariat there are seven legal teams that manage the Court's caseload. Each team is composed of five full-time staff members-one Counsel, who is the lead lawyer in the team, two Assistant Counsel and two secretaries. The Secretariat's teams roughly correspond to different geographic or cultural regions around the world.

When a new case is filed with the ICC, the Secretary General assigns it to one of the Secretariat's seven teams. In assigning a case to a team, the Secretary General takes into consideration, among other things, the nationalities of the parties, the place of arbitration, the languages involved and the applicable law. As far as possible, the idea is to match the case to the team with the most appropriate legal training, cultural background and language skills. In this way, an effort is made to ensure that cases are handled by teams that both literally and figuratively speak the parties' language.

Each team within the Secretariat manages approximately 160 cases at any given time. The work of the Secretariat tends to be heaviest at the beginning of a case, before the arbitral tribunal is constituted and takes over the file. During this period, the Secretariat is in frequent contact with the parties in an effort to resolve outstanding procedural issues and create the arbitral tribunal. To the extent the parties have agreed-either in their arbitration clause or subsequently-on procedural matters (e.g. jurisdiction, the number and identity of arbitrators, the place of arbitration), less work is required of the Secretariat because there are fewer decisions for the Court to make. To the extent the parties disagree on such matters, the work of the Secretariat increases, as the Secretariat must coordinate getting submissions from the parties on the contested procedural issues and preparing those issues for decision by the Court.[Page12:]

The Secretariat is the parties' point of contact with the Court. All submissions to the Court are addressed to the team in charge of the case. For each case in which the Court needs to make a decision, the Secretariat prepares the material documents for the Court's review. These documents include, among other things, the Secretariat's written summary of the factual and procedural history of the case, which sets forth the issues that need to be decided by the Court and the Secretariat's recommendations as to how they should be resolved. The written summary for each case is prepared by the team in charge and is reviewed and finalized in consultation with the Secretary General, the Deputy Secretary General and the General Counsel.

In view of the large number of cases presented for decision at a Committee Session, the documents relevant to those cases often fill two large binders. These binders are assembled at least a week before the Court session at issue, so that the participating Court members can read them in advance. During the Court session, the participating Court members proceed through the binders case by case with the Counsel of the team in charge, in the presence of the Secretary General, Deputy Secretary General and General Counsel. All decisions of the Court are made at the session. The Secretariat then notifies the Court's decisions in writing to the parties, generally on the following business day.

Once the arbitral tribunal has been constituted and the Secretariat has transmitted the file to it, the work of the Secretariat decreases and generally consists in reading the correspondence in the case (on which the Secretariat continues to be copied), keeping tabs on the time limits prescribed by the ICC Rules, monitoring the financial aspect of the case, and answering procedural questions from the arbitral tribunal by telephone. While maintaining strict neutrality, the Secretariat is also available by telephone for any party to ask questions about the application of the ICC Rules.

The work of the Secretariat again becomes busy when it is time for the Court to scrutinize the arbitral tribunal's draft award. Several of the Court's principal functions, including the scrutiny process, are described in the following section.

III. Key functions of the ICC Court

As noted above, the ICC Rules empower the Court to perform various procedural functions in the cases it administers. However, this introductory article focuses only on what are arguably the Court's four most common functions, and explains how the Court and the Secretariat work together in performing them. These functions are (A) fixing the advance on costs, (B) constituting the arbitral tribunal, (C) scrutinizing draft awards and (D) fixing the costs of arbitration.

A. Fixing the advance on costs

One of the Court's central functions is managing the financial aspect of cases proceeding under the ICC Rules.

When filing a Request for Arbitration, the Claimant is required to pay a non-refundable filing fee of US$ 2,500.16 After receiving a Request for Arbitration, the [Page13:] Secretary General will generally fix a provisional budget, known as the 'provisional advance'. The provisional advance is payable by the Claimant and designed to cover the costs of the arbitration until the arbitral tribunal has completed its first task under the ICC Rules, which is to draw up a document setting forth the scope of its mission, otherwise known as the 'Terms of Reference'.17 The Secretariat will only transfer the file to the arbitral tribunal once the provisional advance has been fully paid.

Normally, soon after the Secretary General has fixed the provisional advance, the ICC Court fixes a budget for the entire case that is designed to cover (1) paying the arbitrators for their work, (2) reimbursing the arbitrators for any out-of-pocket expenses they may incur in connection with the case (e.g. travel and hotel expenses)18 and (3) paying the ICC for its services in administering the arbitration. This budget is known as the 'advance on costs'.19

Under the ICC system, both the arbitrators and the ICC are paid on the basis of the amount in dispute (i.e. the sum of the value of the claims and the counterclaims), not on an hourly basis.20 Thus, when fixing the advance on costs, the Court looks principally at the amount in dispute and the number of arbitrators who will hear the case. The bigger the amount in dispute the larger the advance on costs is going to be. This deters parties from artificially inflating the value of their claims.

To get an idea of what the advance on costs may be for any given case, it is useful to visit the cost calculator on the ICC Court's website (www.iccarbitration.org). There, it is possible to enter the amount in dispute and the number of arbitrators and see an estimate of the advance on costs that would be fixed by the Court.21

The advance on costs is in principle payable in equal shares by the parties.22 The Claimant's initial US$ 2,500 filing fee and its payment of the provisional advance are credited towards its half of the advance on costs.23 If one party does not pay its share, the other party is asked to substitute for the defaulting party and pay the outstanding balance of the advance on costs in full.24 If the advance on costs is not paid in full within a final time limit set by the Secretary General, the claims may be considered withdrawn without prejudice to their reintroduction at a later date in another proceeding.25 If one party does substitute for another in paying the advance on costs, the defaulting party nevertheless retains the right to participate fully in the proceedings.26 There are no default judgments in international arbitration.

Where counterclaims are submitted, upon the request of a party, the Court may fix separate budgets for the claims and the counterclaims. This is known as 'fixing separate advances on costs'.27 In such a case, each party is responsible for paying the separate advance fixed for its own claims.28 If one party fails to pay its respective separate advance within a final time limit fixed by the Secretary General, that party's claims may be considered withdrawn without prejudice to their reintroduction at a later date in another proceeding. The claims of the party that has paid its separate advance will continue to be heard by the arbitral tribunal in accordance with the ICC Rules. If a party's claims are considered withdrawn, that party nevertheless retains the right to participate fully in the proceedings and defend against its opponent's claims.29

The Court may reconsider and increase or decrease the advance on costs-or any separate advance on costs-at any time during the procedure if it believes there is reason to do so. Such reasons may include changes in the amount in dispute, changes in the amount of expenses estimated for the arbitrators, or the evolving [Page14:] difficulty or complexity of the arbitration and the amount of work required from the arbitral tribunal.30

B. Constituting the arbitral tribunal

One of the Secretariat and the Court's first tasks in any case is to constitute the arbitral tribunal.

The ICC Rules contemplate arbitral tribunals consisting of a single arbitrator (otherwise known as a sole arbitrator) or three arbitrators (specifically, two co-arbitrators and a chairman).31 If the parties fail to agree on the number of arbitrators, the Court will decide whether to submit the case to a sole arbitrator or a three-member arbitral tribunal.32 In making this decision, the Court will consider, among other things, the amount in dispute and the complexity of the case. The larger the amount in dispute and the greater the complexity of the case, the more likely it is that the Court will submit the case to a three-member arbitral tribunal. The lower the amount in dispute and the simpler the case, the more likely it is that the Court will submit the case to a sole arbitrator.

There are two ways a person may be selected to serve as an arbitrator in an ICC case: a person may be nominated or appointed. These two different avenues are discussed below.

Nominations. Where a case is to be submitted to a sole arbitrator, the parties may jointly nominate one.33 In the absence of a joint nomination, the Court will appoint the sole arbitrator.34 Where the case is to be submitted to a three-member arbitral tribunal, each side may nominate a co-arbitrator.35 The chairman will then be appointed by the Court unless the parties have agreed upon another procedure for the selection of the chairman.36 For example, it is not uncommon for the parties to agree that the co-arbitrators should jointly nominate the chairman.

It is important to note that, in contrast to some domestic systems of arbitration, all arbitrators in ICC arbitrations must be independent of the parties.37 To help ensure this, the Secretariat requires every nominated arbitrator to fill out two forms: a curriculum vitae and a 'statement of independence'. The latter requires all nominees to disclose any facts or circumstances that might be of such a nature as to call into question the nominee's independence in the eyes of the parties.38 The 'in the eyes of the parties' disclosure standard under the ICC Rules is arguably the broadest disclosure standard of any system of arbitral rules. Many other arbitration rules embody an objective disclosure standard, requiring arbitrators to disclose only circumstances likely to give rise to justifiable doubts as to their impartiality or independence.39 By contrast, the subjective, 'in the eyes of the parties' standard requires potential arbitrators to stretch their minds to imagine how facts that they may consider innocuous could be viewed by the parties. Any doubt should be resolved in favour of disclosure.

Once the nominee has completed the curriculum vitae and statement of independence forms and returned them to the Secretariat, the Secretariat circulates the forms to the parties and, if the nominee has made a disclosure, invites the parties' comments.40 If no comments are received, then the nominee may be [Page15:] confirmed by either the Court or the Secretary General.41 If a party objects to the nominee, the Court must decide, in light of the disclosure and the parties' comments, whether or not to confirm the nominee.42

Appointments. When the Court must appoint an arbitrator, the process is somewhat different. The appointment of an arbitrator in ICC arbitration is typically a two-step process: first, the Court generally invites one of the ICC National Committees to propose a candidate to serve as arbitrator; second, the Court decides whether or not to appoint the person the National Committee has proposed.

As to the first step, when the Court is to appoint a co-arbitrator on behalf of a party that has failed to nominate one, the Court typically invites the National Committee of that party's country to propose a co-arbitrator having the same nationality as the defaulting party.43 Where the Court is to appoint a sole arbitrator or a chairman, the Court typically turns to a National Committee of a country different from that of any of the parties to propose a person who does not have the same nationality as any of the parties.44

National Committees represent the ICC in some ninety different countries around the world. The ICC's National Committee system gives the Court immense reach and diversity of choice when appointing arbitrators. In deciding which National Committee to invite to propose a sole arbitrator or chairman, the Court takes into account all material aspects of the case, including the subject matter in dispute, the place and language of arbitration and the applicable law. The Court's goal is to select a National Committee that has suitable candidates for the case.

After the Court has decided which National Committee to invite, the Secretariat notifies the National Committee of the Court's decision and provides the National Committee with a summary of the dispute and other information material to the National Committee's proposal. The Secretariat also often engages in an informal dialogue with the National Committee to exchange ideas about people who may be appropriate for the case.

Once the National Committee has settled on the candidate it wishes to propose, the National Committee sends the candidate the curriculum vitae and statement of independence forms. After the candidate has filled out the forms, the National Committee forwards the completed forms to the Secretariat. If the candidate makes any disclosure on the statement of independence form, the Secretariat will normally ask the National Committee to propose a different candidate. This is because the Court ordinarily will not appoint an arbitrator who has made a disclosure on his statement of independence. As the Court is appointing an arbitrator (rather than confirming an arbitrator, where a disclosure does not automatically bar a person from serving as arbitrator), the Court is cautious so as to minimize the chance that any person it appoints may be objectionable to any of the parties. Caution is particularly warranted because the candidate's identity, curriculum vitae and statement of independence are not disclosed to the parties until after the candidate has been appointed by the Court.

Once the Secretariat has received the completed forms of the candidate the National Committee wishes to propose, the Secretariat invites the Court to take the second step in the appointment process and decide whether or not to appoint the candidate proposed by the National Committee.45 In making this decision, the Court considers [Page16:] all material aspects of the case and the profile of the candidate in order to evaluate whether the candidate is appropriate for the case, in light of his professional experience, language skills and availability. If the Court considers the candidate appropriate, it appoints him. If not, the Court will generally seek another proposal from either the same National Committee or a different one.46

As soon as the arbitral tribunal is fully constituted and the provisional advance paid, the Secretariat sends the file to the arbitrators.

C. Scrutinizing draft awards

One of the unique services the Court provides parties to ICC arbitrations is the scrutiny of draft awards. Unlike any other system of arbitration rules, the ICC Rules require that the arbitral tribunal submit all awards (be they partial, interim or final) in draft to the ICC Court for scrutiny and approval.47 Only after the Court has approved a draft award may the arbitral tribunal sign it and send it to the Secretariat for notification to the parties.

The scrutiny process raises the quality and enforceability of ICC awards. The value of the scrutiny process for the parties cannot be overstated. The author has never seen a draft award that did not benefit-often enormously-from scrutiny, be it because of typographical and computational errors, erroneous legal reasoning or even procedural errors so severe as to undermine the enforceability of the award altogether. The scrutiny process is designed to address all of these problems.

Although the Court's scrutiny of draft awards is designed to capture problems of both substance and form, it is important to note that the Court's power to require changes to draft awards is limited. While the Court may require the arbitral tribunal to make changes to the form of the draft award-e.g. to ensure that the award complies with the requirements of the place of arbitration-the Court does not have the power to require the arbitral tribunal to make changes to the substance of the draft award.48 As noted above, the power to decide the substantive issues in the case rests with the arbitral tribunal alone, and nothing in the scrutiny process changes this. As a result, if the Court disagrees with the arbitral tribunal on a matter of substance, the Court may only draw its concern to the attention of the arbitral tribunal for the arbitral tribunal's consideration. That is all. The arbitral tribunal is free to ignore the Court's comments, and the Court may not refuse to approve the draft award on this basis.

Scrutiny is a labour-intensive process, both for the Secretariat and the ICC Court. When the arbitral tribunal has prepared a draft award, it submits it to the Secretariat. The draft award is then read by the Counsel heading the team in charge of the case. If the Counsel identifies problems with the draft, it is not uncommon for the Counsel to contact the arbitral tribunal to exchange ideas and discuss potential modifications. The Counsel then submits the draft to the Secretary General, Deputy Secretary General or General Counsel, who also reads the draft and helps the team prepare comments for the Court's consideration. The draft award is then submitted to the Court for scrutiny, together with the Secretariat's comments as to how the draft may be improved.

As mentioned above, most draft awards are submitted for scrutiny to one of the Court's weekly Committee Sessions. When this is the case, the draft award is [Page17:] provided to the three Court members participating in the Committee Session. Some awards, however, are submitted to the Court's monthly Plenary Sessions. These awards tend to be those involving large amounts in dispute, particularly complex or novel legal issues, State parties or dissenting opinions.49 Awards submitted to the Plenary Session are distributed for review by all Court members in attendance. In addition, the Court member acting as the reporter examines the file and prepares a report on the draft award. As a result, in the course of the scrutiny process, a draft award is often read by over thirty arbitration specialists from around the world.

Because only the ICC has a body like the Court, only the ICC can offer such an invaluable service to parties. Indeed, if Court members were paid for the time they dedicate to scrutinizing awards (not to mention the time they spend on other Court decisions), the cost to the parties would be prohibitive. As Court members are not paid for their time, however, these costs are not borne by the parties, but rather by the individual Court members.

When scrutinizing a draft award, the Court may effectively make three decisions. First, the Court may simply approve the draft award. Second, the Court may approve the draft award but invite the arbitral tribunal to make changes to the award when finalizing it for notification to the parties. Lastly, the Court may decide to invite the arbitral tribunal to make changes to the draft award and to submit a revised draft for scrutiny by the Court at a future session.

Which decision the Court makes depends largely on the condition of the draft award. For example, if the draft is fundamentally sound, but contains computational errors, the Court is likely to approve it subject to the arbitral tribunal's addressing the computational errors. If, on the other hand, the draft award raises serious substantive concerns, the Court is more likely to raise comments for the arbitral tribunal's consideration and request that a revised draft be submitted for scrutiny at a later session. Any decision the Court makes with respect to a draft award, including the Court's comments on the draft, is notified only to the arbitral tribunal, not the parties.

Despite its rigour, the scrutiny process is designed normally to take as little as two weeks from the date the Secretariat receives the draft award. This time can, of course, vary depending on, among other things, whether the draft award needs to be translated, whether it will be submitted to a Committee or Plenary Session, the condition of the draft and the responsiveness of the arbitral tribunal in making any requested changes.50 Parties wanting information about the status of any award should feel free to contact the arbitral tribunal directly.

Once the Court has approved the draft award, and the arbitral tribunal has made any required modifications, the arbitral tribunal signs the award and sends it to the Secretariat for notification to the parties. Notification is generally made by courier.

D. Fixing the costs of the arbitration

As detailed above, early in each case, the Court fixes a budget designed to cover (1) paying the arbitrators for their work, (2) reimbursing the arbitrators for out-of-pocket expenses they may incur in connection with the case and (3) paying the ICC for its services in administering the arbitration. This is only a budget, however; how much [Page18:] the arbitrators and the ICC will actually be paid is a separate question to be decided by the Court at the end of each case.51 This is commonly referred to as 'fixing the costs of the arbitration'.

In deciding how much arbitrators are to be paid, the Court takes into account their diligence and time spent, the rapidity of the proceedings and the complexity of the dispute.52 Where the case has gone through to a final award on the merits, the Court will usually decide to pay the arbitrators all of the money budgeted to cover their work, and will also usually decide to pay the ICC all of the money budgeted to cover the costs of administering the case.53 If an arbitration terminates before a final award is rendered, the Court takes into account the stage of the proceedings and the work done by the arbitral tribunal, as well as all other relevant circumstances, in deciding how much to pay the arbitrators and the ICC.54 Where a case terminates before a final award is rendered, it is not uncommon for money to be reimbursed to the parties. In no case will the Court fix the costs of arbitration at an amount greater than the amount of money the parties have advanced for the arbitration. Separate fee arrangements between the parties and the arbitral tribunal are not permitted.55

While it is the Court that determines how much the arbitrators and the ICC are to be paid, it is the arbitral tribunal that decides how these costs are to be apportioned between the parties.56 The ICC Rules grant arbitral tribunals wide discretion on this point, leaving them free to apportion costs as they see fit and to order one party to reimburse another in the final award.57

Conclusion

Since its founding in 1923, the ICC Court has been a pioneer in the development of international arbitration. From taking the lead in securing worldwide acceptance of arbitration as the most effective way to settle international business disputes, to setting the standard for excellence in the administration of arbitral cases, the Court has long been the institution of reference in the field of international arbitration.58 This prestige and experience directly benefit the parties in ICC cases. The Court's expertise underlies all of the decisions it makes, and its approval gives ICC awards an imprimatur that is recognized worldwide.59

1
This article represents the personal views of the author and should not be interpreted as binding upon the ICC or the ICC International Court of Arbitration.

2
Articles 1(1) and 1(2); Appendix 1, Article 1. The ICC Rules referred to in this article are those that came into force on 1 January 1998. References in this article to an 'Article' or 'Appendix' are references to the Articles and Appendices of the ICC Rules, unless otherwise indicated. The ICC Rules are available on the Court's website (www.iccarbitration.org) in the two official languages of the Court-English and French-as well as in Arabic, Chinese, Czech, Dutch, German, Italian, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish and Turkish.

3
Article 30.

4
Article 6(2).

5
Article 14.

6
Articles 7, 8 and 9.

7
Article 11.

8
Article 27.

9
Article 31.

10
Article 15(1), Article 20 and Article 21.

11
A list of the Court's members is available on the Court's website (www.iccarbitration.org).

12
Appendix II, Article 2(2). Court members may, however, be nominated by parties to serve as arbitrators, and may also serve as counsel to parties in ICC cases. There is one exception to this: the Chairman of the Court may not act as arbitrator or counsel to parties in ICC cases under any circumstances (Appendix II, Article 2(1)).

13
Appendix II, Article 2(4).

14
Appendix I, Article 6; Appendix II, Article 1.

15
Article 1(5).

16
Appendix III, Article 1(1).

17
Article 30(1); Appendix III, Article 1(2). For more information about Terms of Reference, see Article 18 of the ICC Rules.

18
The reimbursement of arbitrators' out-of-pocket expenses is governed by the Secretariat's Notice on Personal and Arbitral Tribunal Expenses dated 1 January 2005. To receive a copy of this note, please contact the Secretariat.

19
Article 30(2); Appendix III, Article 1(4).

20
Appendix III, Article 2(1), Article 2(5), Article 4 and the Scales of Administrative Expenses and Arbitrator's Fees.

21
The estimates produced by the cost calculator are based on the Scales of Administrative Expenses and Arbitrator's Fees set forth in Appendix III, Article 4. It is important to note that the estimates produced by the cost calculator do not limit the Court's discretion in any way. Moreover, such estimates do not factor in an amount to cover the out-of-pocket expenses of the arbitrators. Accordingly, the actual advance on costs fixed by the Court will often be somewhat higher than the estimate produced by the cost calculator.

22
Article 30(3).

23
Appendix III, Article 1(1) and Article 1(2).

24
Article 30(3).

25
Article 30(4). As a matter of practice, the team in charge of a case will generally give parties a series of successive time limits in which to pay the advance on costs. In this regard, it is not uncommon for a team to grant parties a series of time limits totalling over sixty days to pay the advance on costs in full. Only if parties ultimately fail to comply with the time limits set by the team does the Secretary General send a letter specifying a final time limit for the payment of the advance on costs, after which the case may be considered withdrawn.

26
See Article 15(2) and Article 21(3).

27
Article 30(2).

28
Appendix III, Article 1(7).

29
See Article 15(2) and Article 21(3).

30
Appendix III, Article 1(10).

31
Article 2.

32
Article 8(2).

33
Article 8(3).

34
Ibid.

35
Article 8(2) and Article 8(4).

36
Article 8(4).

37
Article 7(1).

38
Article 7(2).

39
See e.g. Article 9 of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (requiring disclosure of 'any circumstances likely to give rise to justifiable doubts as to his impartiality or independence') and, similarly, Article 7(1) of the International Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association and Article 5(3) of the Rules of the London Court of International Arbitration.

40
Article 7(2).

41
Article 9(1) and Article 9(2).

42
When a party objects to a nominee, the Secretariat normally only requests comments from the opposing party, not from the nominee. Here, it is important to note that objections to nominees should not be confused with challenges to arbitrators. Objections to nominees occur before the nominee has been confirmed by the Court-i.e. before the nominee has become an arbitrator in the case. Challenges to arbitrators may only be brought after the nominee has been confirmed by the Court and thereby become an arbitrator in the case. Article 11 of the ICC Rules, which is the provision governing challenges, requires, among other things, that the Secretariat afford any arbitrator who has been challenged the opportunity to comment on the challenge. There is no similar requirement that nominees be afforded an opportunity to comment on objections to their confirmation.

43
Article 9(6).

44
Article 9(3) and Article 9(5).

45
Article 9(3).

46
Ibid.

47
Article 27.

48
Ibid.

49
When a draft award with a dissenting opinion is presented for scrutiny, the Court receives a copy of the dissenting opinion for its information. The Court reads the dissenting opinion in connection with its scrutiny of the draft award, but the Court does not scrutinize the dissenting opinion and makes no comments on it.

50
In cases that are particularly time-sensitive, a draft award may be scrutinized in a matter of days or even hours. See Article 1(3).

51
Article 31(1).

52
Appendix III, Article 2(2).

53
Appendix III, Article 2(5).

54
Appendix III, Article 2(6).

55
Appendix III, Article 2(4).

56
Article 31(3).

57
Arbitral tribunals in ICC cases may also apportion other costs incurred by the parties, including expert costs and attorneys' fees (Article 31(1) and Article 31(3)). This stands in contrast to some domestic legal systems that normally require each party to pay its own attorneys' fees.

58
Another way in which the Court helps further the development of international arbitration is through the publication of arbitral awards. Redacted extracts from ICC awards may be found in a number of publications in various languages. For more information, visit the 'Awards' page on the Court's website (www.iccarbitration.org).

59
Arbitration is not the only dispute resolution service offered by the ICC. The ICC also offers a pre-arbitral referee procedure, amicable dispute resolution services (e.g. mediation), expertise proceedings (including DOCDEX), and rules for establishing and operating Dispute Boards. To learn more about these services, please visit the Court's website (www.iccarbitration.org).