HKIAC Announces Expansion of Expedited Procedure and Updates Regarding Fees

On December 17, 2025, the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (“HKIAC”) announced updates to its expedited procedure mechanism and fees. These changes will apply to all cases submitted to HKIAC under its Administered Arbitration Rules (the “Administered Arbitration Rules”) from January 1, 2026. The expedited procedure will remain an opt-in mechanism, and parties must apply for its use in eligible cases. The expedited procedure offers several advantages, including the default use of a sole arbitrator, shorter timelines for key steps and the award, and streamlined processes that reduce cost and complexity.

Based on HKIAC’s published statistics, HKIAC received 24 applications for the expedited procedure in 2024, 24 applications in 2023, and 20 applications in 2022. The relatively steady level of uptake may have informed HKIAC’s decision to broaden access to the procedure. By introducing these updates, HKIAC aims to enhance the flexibility and efficiency of its administered arbitrations. The key changes include the following:

• Expanding the Scope of Expedited Procedure: Under the existing mechanism, parties may agree to adopt the expedited procedure, or a party may apply to HKIAC for the arbitration to proceed under the expedited procedure under Article 42.2 of the Administered Arbitration Rules where the amount in dispute, representing the aggregate of any claim and counterclaim (or any set-off defense or cross-claim), does not exceed HK$25 million (approximately US$3.2 million).
  
  HKIAC’s latest updates widen access to expedited proceedings by doubling the monetary threshold of the maximum amount in dispute to HK$50 million (approximately US$6.4 million). This change reflects a continuing trend among arbitral institutions to broaden the availability of streamlined proceedings for mid-value disputes. For example, in the 7th edition of its arbitration rules (effective January 1, 2025), the Singapore International Arbitration Centre increased its threshold for expedited procedure from S$6 million (approximately US$4.6 million) to S$10 million (approximately US$ 7.7 million).
• Raising the Cap on Arbitrators’ Hourly Rates: A unique feature of HKIAC arbitrations is its dual‑track remuneration system for arbitrators, allowing parties to choose between remuneration based on hourly rates or an ad valorem fee model based on the sum in dispute. As part of the latest updates, HKIAC will raise the cap on arbitrators’ hourly rates from HK$6,500 to HK$7,500 – its first adjustment since 2013. The Study (referenced and defined below) indicates that approximately half of the arbitrators appointed and/or confirmed in HKIAC arbitrations over the past five years applied hourly rates close to or at the cap. The revised ceiling therefore reflects market practice and acknowledges the complexity and demands of many of the disputes administered by HKIAC.
• Increasing Registration Fees: HKIAC will increase its registration fee from HK$8,000 (approximately US$1,028) to HK$10,000 (approximately US$1,285), marking the first adjustment in 12 years. The modest increase reflects HKIAC’s commitment to providing high-quality arbitration services while maintaining fees that remain accessible to users. 

Publication of the Tribunal Hourly Rate Study

In addition, HKIAC has released its new Tribunal Hourly Rate Study (the “Study”), which provides empirical insights into arbitrator fee trends over a five-year period from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2024. The Study increases transparency regarding the costs of HKIAC-administered arbitrations and provides users with data-driven insights to support more informed decision making. Notable findings include:

• Majority remunerate arbitrators by hourly rates: Approximately 97% of the arbitrations conducted under the Administered Arbitration Rules in the last five years remunerate arbitrators by hourly rates. This highlights the distinctive nature of HKIAC’s dual-track system: although parties may opt for an ad valorem fee structure, in practice users overwhelmingly gravitate toward hourly remuneration.
• Most appointments/confirmations applied hourly rates between HK$6,000 (approximately US$769) and HK$6,500 (approximately US$833): During the five-year period, the most common hourly rates fell between HK$6,000 and HK$6,500 (i.e., the current upper limit of the permitted hourly rate), which are approximately US$769 and US$833. About 44 percent of appointments or confirmations applied hourly rates in this range.
• Sole arbitrators typically charge less than co-arbitrators and presiding arbitrators: The average hourly rates of sole arbitrators were generally lower than those of arbitrators in a three-member tribunal. For disputes below HK$5 million, which is approximately US$643,000, the average hourly rate of a sole arbitrator was about 63% of that of a co-arbitrator and 55% of that of a presiding arbitrator in a three-member tribunal. In larger cases exceeding HK$250 million, which is approximately US$32.1 million, sole arbitrators tended to charge hourly rates that were between 72% and 80% of those of co-arbitrators and between 79% and 94% of those of presiding arbitrators.
• Higher hourly rates for arbitrators designated by co-arbitrators and/or the parties: The average hourly rates for arbitrators designated by co-arbitrators and/or the parties were consistently higher than those appointed by HKIAC. HKIAC-appointed arbitrators charged around 70% to 94% of the average hourly rate for those designated by co-arbitrators and/or the parties.

Conclusion

The updates, together with the publication of the Study, underscore HKIAC’s continued commitment to a user-focused and transparent framework, aligning its practices with the evolving expectations of users in a competitive arbitral landscape. The higher threshold for expedited procedure will improve the efficiency of HKIAC-administered arbitrations, particularly for mid-sized disputes.

Since HKIAC remains one of the few institutions that provides parties with a choice of compensation models for arbitrators, the Study offers valuable insight for users in evaluating costs considerations when drafting arbitration clauses, selecting arbitrators, and choosing between hourly and ad valorem fee structures.

Morrison Foerster Trainee Ellen Yau also made contribution to this article.