For all of its advantages as a means of dispute resolution, international commercial arbitration has a few drawbacks. It may, in some instances, be slow, depending on the complexity of the case, and may also be costly, although it is still typically faster and less expensive than litigation in the courts. While the pluses of arbitration often outweigh the negatives, these drawbacks have become increasingly concerning to parties, and a big source of criticism of international commercial arbitration.

Arbitral institutions have taken note of these criticisms, and responded to the need to control the increasing costs and time of arbitration proceedings by creating expedited arbitration procedures to give parties the option of a faster route towards the resolution of their disputes, and at a lower cost.¹

These faster and lower-cost procedures have been greeted enthusiastically by users world-wide, and an increasing number of arbitral institutions have followed suit, amending or issuing new sets of expedited arbitration rules. However, is expedited arbitration the best means of resolution for every dispute? Is faster always better? When is expedited arbitration really the fastest and most effective way of dispute resolution? The answer to these questions will invariably depend on the specific case at hand. However, we can derive certain guidelines to identify which types of disputes provide the perfect fit for expedited procedures.