ICC Arbitration Bangladesh 2026: The New ICC Rules, Costs, Settlement and Enforcement

ICC arbitration Bangladesh parties face under the 2026 Rules

ICC arbitration Bangladesh parties sign up to today runs on a new rulebook. The ICC Arbitration Rules 2026 entered into force on 1 June 2026 and apply to every ICC arbitration commenced on or after that date, unless the parties agreed to an earlier version.[1] The 2021 Rules still govern cases filed before 1 June 2026. The changes are practical rather than cosmetic: mandatory Terms of Reference have gone, a new early determination procedure and a Highly Expedited track have arrived, and the expedited procedure threshold has risen to US$4 million for new agreements.[2]

This guide is written for Bangladeshi companies, state-owned entities and foreign investors who have an ICC clause, or are about to agree one. It explains how the ICC Court and Secretariat run a case, what the 2026 Rules change, how fees are calculated, how compensation and settlement work, what Saipem v Bangladesh and the Smith Cogeneration payment teach, and how an ICC award is enforced in Bangladesh. The wider choice between institutions and seats is covered in our companion guides.

Summary: ICC arbitrations commenced on or after 1 June 2026 run under the 2026 Rules: there are no mandatory Terms of Reference, the tribunal must hold an initial case management conference within 30 days of receiving the file, and new claims after that conference need the tribunal's permission. Disputes under US$4 million (for agreements made from 1 June 2026) go to the expedited procedure with a six-month award deadline. In Bangladesh, a Dhaka-seated ICC award is enforced as a decree under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 2001, and a foreign-seated ICC award through the District Judge's Court in Dhaka under sections 45 and 46.

Key point: An ICC clause is only as strong as a party's willingness to take part. In the Smith Cogeneration case, the Power Development Board declined to pay its US$60,000 share of the ICC advance, the tribunal ruled without it in 2003, and Bangladesh paid US$20 million in 2025 after US enforcement steps led to arrest warrants against two senior officials.[10] Defaulting on an ICC arbitration rarely makes it go away.

At a glance

Swipe or scroll →

Table of Contents

Why ICC arbitration Bangladesh contracts still matter in 2026

The ICC is the largest of the international institutions that Bangladeshi parties use. Practitioner guides list the ICC, ICSID and SIAC as the bodies most commonly chosen by Bangladeshi parties, with the UNCITRAL Rules dominant for ad hoc cases.[6] ICC clauses appear most often in power purchase agreements, EPC and pipeline contracts, telecoms supply, aircraft and shipping deals and loan documentation, where at least one party wants a non-Bangladeshi institution and a recognised scrutiny process.

The ICC's own figures show why it remains the default for large projects. In 2025 it registered 881 new cases under its Arbitration Rules, involving 2,531 parties from 147 countries and territories, and ended the year with a record 1,869 pending cases.[5]

ICC 2025 developments that shaped the new Rules

Three trends in the 2025 caseload explain the 2026 revision. The median amount in dispute in new cases was about US$5 million, against an average of about US$50 million, so a typical ICC case is far smaller than its reputation.[5] The expedited procedure was used in 169 new cases, bringing the total since 2017 to 1,034.[5] The ICC also recorded a significant rise in parties from East and South Asia, and India returned to its top ten nationalities.[5] Smaller, faster and more Asian cases pushed the ICC towards a higher expedited threshold and a still faster track.

The Bangladeshi policy backdrop

Domestically, arbitration reform is back on the agenda. On 21 May 2026 the Law Minister, Md Asaduzzaman, said the Arbitration Act 2001 has limitations that "can be fixed easily", that arbitrator fees keep ordinary businesspeople away and that long pendency undermines the Act's purpose, and that the government wants amendments that help businesses.[13] No amending bill had been published by October 2026, so every ICC arbitration Bangladesh courts touch is still governed by the 2001 Act as it stands.

2021 Rules or 2026 Rules: which edition applies

Article 1(2) of the 2026 Rules provides that they apply to any arbitration commenced on or after 1 June 2026, unless the parties have agreed to submit to an earlier version.[1] The trigger is the date the Request for Arbitration is filed, not the date the contract was signed. A clause agreed in 2019 that simply refers to "the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce" will therefore bring in the 2026 Rules for a dispute filed today.

Two exceptions matter in practice. First, a clause that expressly selects "the ICC Rules of Arbitration 2021" or "in force at the date of this agreement" will normally keep the earlier edition. Second, the expedited procedure threshold depends on when the arbitration agreement was concluded, not when the case starts, so an older contract can sit under the 2026 Rules with a lower threshold.[1] Fees follow the commencement date: the ICC calculator applies the 2026 scales to requests filed on or after 1 June 2026 and the 2017 scales to earlier requests.[4]

The table below compares the main features. On a phone, scroll it sideways.

How the ICC Court and Secretariat run a case

The ICC does not decide disputes. Under Article 1(1) of the 2026 Rules, the parties are deemed to agree that the arbitration is administered exclusively by the ICC International Court of Arbitration, while the arbitral tribunal decides the merits.[1] The ICC Court supervises the process rather than deciding the merits; the Secretariat, under the Secretary General, manages each file day to day. That division is the main thing a party buys with an ICC clause.

Functions of the Secretariat

The Secretary General has real powers under the 2026 Rules. Under Article 14, the Secretary General may confirm party-nominated co-arbitrators, sole arbitrators and presidents.[1] Under Article 40, the Secretary General may request a provisional advance from the claimant after receiving the Request and then fixes the full advance on costs by reference to the amount in dispute.[1] Electronic communication is now the default for written communications with the Secretariat and for filing the Request, the Answer and any request for joinder.[2]

Functions of the ICC Court

The ICC Court appoints arbitrators where a party fails to nominate, fixes the seat where the parties have not agreed one, and scrutinises every draft award.[1] If the parties have not agreed the number of arbitrators, Article 13(2) provides that it appoints a sole arbitrator unless it decides the dispute warrants three.[1] For a Bangladeshi party that forgot to specify three arbitrators, that default can come as a surprise in a large case, and it is a reason to settle the number in the clause.

Request, Answer and constitution of the tribunal

The claimant files a Request for Arbitration and, under Article 5(4), pays the filing fee set out in the Schedule of Fees.[1] The respondent has 30 days from receiving the Request from the Secretariat to file its Answer under Article 6(1).[1] Each prospective arbitrator must sign a statement of acceptance, availability, impartiality and independence, and under Article 12(2) any doubt about whether to disclose a fact is resolved in favour of disclosure.[1] Parties must also identify relevant persons and entities at the outset so conflict checks can be run.[2]

Third-party funding must be disclosed. Article 12(6) requires each party to inform the Secretariat, the tribunal and the other parties promptly of the existence and identity of any non-party that has an arrangement to fund its claims or defences.[1] The Arbitration Act 2001 is silent on funding and no Bangladeshi rule restricts funders, so the ICC requirement is the operative one.[6]

Terms of Reference and the new case management conference

For decades, Terms of Reference were the signature feature of ICC arbitration. Under the 2021 Rules the tribunal drew up a document summarising the claims, the issues and the procedure, normally within 30 days of receiving the file, and after it was signed new claims needed the tribunal's permission.[2] The 2026 Rules abolish that requirement.[2] Practitioners who learned ICC procedure before 2026 should not assume the old sequence.

What replaces them

Article 24(1) now requires the tribunal to hold an initial case management conference within 30 days from receiving the file from the Secretariat, and Article 24(2) requires it to establish the procedural timetable it intends to follow.[1] Article 25 then makes the initial conference the cut-off point: after it, a party may bring new claims only with the tribunal's authorisation.[1] [2]

The practical effect is that the full claim must be ready earlier. Under the 2021 Rules there was often time before Terms of Reference were signed to refine quantum and add heads of claim. Under the 2026 Rules, a claim or counterclaim not raised before the initial conference may be shut out, so the Request and the Answer should plead every arguable head of loss, with figures, even if expert evidence comes later.

Cases still under the 2021 Rules

For an ICC arbitration Bangladesh counsel commenced before 1 June 2026, Terms of Reference still apply and remain the cut-off for new claims. Many pending power, gas and construction cases fall into this category.

Early determination, interim relief and emergency arbitrators

Article 30 introduces an express early determination power. Any party may ask the tribunal to determine early one or more claims or defences that are manifestly without merit or manifestly outside the tribunal's jurisdiction, and the tribunal has discretion whether to allow the application and how to proceed.[1] [2] For a Bangladeshi respondent facing an inflated claim, or a claimant facing a defence raised only to delay, this is a useful new tool. It is not a summary judgment on disputed facts, and tribunals will be slow to use it where evidence is genuinely contested.

Emergency arbitrator and preliminary orders

A party that needs interim or conservatory measures that cannot await the constitution of the tribunal may apply to an emergency arbitrator under Article 31 and Appendix IV.[1] The 2026 Rules expressly permit applications without notice to the other side, for example where assets may be dissipated, provided the other parties are later given a reasonable opportunity to be heard, and extend the procedure to any party for which the President is satisfied that a binding arbitration agreement may exist.[2] In 2025, 30 new ICC cases began with an emergency arbitrator application.[5]

How Bangladeshi courts fit in

Article 29(2) confirms that applying to a court for interim measures is not a waiver of the arbitration agreement.[1] Whether a Bangladeshi court will act depends on the seat. For a Dhaka-seated international commercial arbitration, section 7A of the Arbitration Act 2001 lets the High Court Division grant injunctions, appoint receivers and restrain transfers of property from before the proceedings until the award is enforced.[7] For a foreign-seated ICC arbitration, Bangladeshi courts have held since Accom Travels that section 7A relief is unavailable before or during the arbitration, though it may be available at the enforcement stage.[6]

The Act contains no provisions on emergency arbitrators.[6] An emergency arbitrator's order binds the parties contractually under the ICC Rules, but it is not an award, and there is no settled route to enforce it through a Bangladeshi court. A party relying on a foreign seat should plan its asset protection with that gap in mind.

Expedited and Highly Expedited ICC arbitration Bangladesh parties can use

Article 32 provides that the Expedited Procedure Provisions in Appendix V take precedence over any contrary terms of the arbitration agreement.[1] The procedure applies automatically to disputes at or below a threshold that depends on when the arbitration agreement was concluded, unless the parties have opted out.[2] Under Appendix V, Article 1, the threshold is US$2 million for agreements concluded from 1 March 2017 to before 1 January 2021, US$3 million for agreements concluded from 1 January 2021 to before 1 June 2026, and US$4 million for agreements concluded on or after 1 June 2026.[1]

Under the expedited procedure, the tribunal must render its final award within six months from the date of the initial case management conference, subject to extension by the President of the ICC Court.[1] Many Bangladeshi supply and service disputes fall well within these limits. A contractor with a Tk 30 crore claim under a 2023 contract will usually find itself in the expedited procedure whether or not the clause mentions it.

The new Highly Expedited track

Article 33 adds Highly Expedited Arbitration under Appendix VI, available only when all parties agree.[1] It has no monetary threshold, requires the Request to be combined with the Statement of Claim and the Answer with the Statement of Defence, uses a sole arbitrator and excludes joinder and consolidation.[2] If the parties do not jointly nominate the sole arbitrator within 20 days of the respondent receiving the Request, the ICC Court appoints one directly, and the final award is due within three months of the initial case management conference.[1]

The track suits documents-only disputes such as unpaid invoices or simple delivery claims, not cases needing site inspections or extensive translation. For ICC arbitration Bangladesh parties, it is best agreed after a dispute arises, when its scope is known.

Time limits outside the expedited procedure

The 2021 Rules set a default six-month limit for the final award in ordinary cases, routinely extended. The 2026 Rules remove that default: under Article 34, the President of the ICC Court fixes, and may extend, the time limit, taking into account the procedural timetable or a reasoned request from the tribunal.[1] [2] Article 28 requires the tribunal to tell the Secretariat and the parties when it expects to submit its draft award.[1]

Scrutiny of the award by the ICC Court

Scrutiny is the feature that most distinguishes ICC arbitration from ad hoc and many institutional alternatives. Article 37 requires the tribunal to submit every draft award to the ICC Court before signing it. The Court may require modifications to the form of the award and, without affecting the tribunal's liberty of decision, may draw its attention to points of substance. No award may be rendered until the Court has approved its form.[1]

Article 37(3) adds that the Court considers, to the extent practicable, the validity and enforceability of the award and the requirements of mandatory law at the place of arbitration.[1] For a Dhaka seat that means the requirements of section 38 of the Arbitration Act 2001: an award in writing, signed by the arbitrators, stating its date and place and, unless the parties agreed otherwise or the award is on agreed terms, giving reasons.[7] Scrutiny reduces, but does not remove, the risk of a successful challenge under section 43.

Correction, interpretation and remission

Article 39 covers correction and interpretation of awards and additional awards, and now expressly provides that if a court remits an award to the tribunal, the provisions on making, scrutiny, notification and correction of awards apply to the resulting decision.[1] Awards may be signed electronically under Article 38(1), and hearings may be held in person, remotely or in hybrid form under Article 27(1).[1]

The waiver of recourse and Bangladeshi law

Article 38(3) records that the parties undertake to comply with any award without delay and waive their right to any form of recourse insofar as such waiver can validly be made.[1] In Bangladesh it cannot remove the statutory challenge. The Arbitration Act 2001 contains no provision allowing the parties to exclude or widen the grounds for setting aside, so an award in a Dhaka-seated ICC arbitration remains open to an application under sections 42 and 43.[6] For a Dhaka-seated international commercial arbitration, that application goes to the High Court Division within sixty days of receiving the award.[7] Our guide to setting aside arbitral awards in Bangladesh covers the grounds and the deadlines.

ICC fees, the advance on costs and the cost calculator

ICC costs are set on an ad valorem basis: administrative expenses and arbitrator fees are fixed according to the amount in dispute, and the ICC Court may fix arbitrator fees above or below the scale where the circumstances require.[3] The claimant pays a non-refundable filing payment of US$5,000 with the Request, which is a condition of the Secretariat notifying the Request; a party asking to join an additional party pays the same amount.[3]

Provisional advance and advance on costs

The Secretary General fixes a provisional advance on or soon after receiving the Request, based on the principal claims, to cover costs until the initial case management conference. The Court and Secretariat normally wait for payment before taking significant steps to constitute the tribunal.[3] The full advance on costs, based on claims and counterclaims, is then payable in equal shares, with the claimant's earlier payments credited to its share. Separate advances may be fixed for a claim and a counterclaim, and if one party refuses to pay its share, the other may be invited to pay it.[3]

That last rule is why non-payment is a poor tactic in any ICC arbitration Bangladesh respondents face. The claimant pays the whole advance, the case proceeds, and the respondent loses influence without stopping anything. Budget the advance in foreign currency at the outset, including time for any approvals a state entity needs to remit it.

Using the ICC cost calculator

The ICC publishes an online calculator that estimates administrative expenses and arbitrator fees from the amount in dispute, the filing date, the procedure (ordinary, expedited or highly expedited) and the number of arbitrators.[4] The result is an illustrative estimate of the advance, based on average arbitrator fees. It excludes arbitrators' expenses and has no legal effect.[4] Legal fees, experts, translation and hearing costs come on top and usually exceed the ICC's own charges. Our guide to the cost of arbitration in Bangladesh compares ICC, SIAC and BIAC budgets.

Compensation and settlement in ICC arbitration

An ICC tribunal applies the law the parties chose. Most contracts with Bangladeshi counterparties choose Bangladeshi law, so compensation for breach is assessed under the Contract Act 1872. Section 73 entitles the injured party to compensation for loss which naturally arose in the usual course of things from the breach, or which the parties knew when contracting to be likely to result from it, but not for remote and indirect loss.[12] Section 74 caps recovery under a liquidated damages or penalty clause at reasonable compensation not exceeding the stipulated amount, whether or not actual loss is proved.[12]

That framework matters for the way an ICC arbitration Bangladesh claimant builds its quantum. Delay damages, lost profits and acceleration costs need proof that they were within the parties' contemplation, and a liquidated damages figure sets a ceiling rather than an automatic entitlement. Respondents should test every head of loss against section 73 remoteness from the Answer onwards, because after the initial conference the shape of the case is fixed.

Interest and costs in the award

For a Dhaka seat, section 38(6) of the Arbitration Act 2001 allows the tribunal, unless the parties agree otherwise, to award interest at a reasonable rate from the date the cause of action arose to the date of the award. A sum awarded then carries interest, unless the award directs otherwise, at two per cent per annum above the Bangladesh Bank rate from the award to payment.[7] Section 38(7) leaves the parties free to agree how costs are dealt with and otherwise requires the tribunal to fix them and say who pays, how much and how.[7]

Under Article 41 of the 2026 Rules, the costs of the arbitration include the arbitrators' fees and expenses, ICC administrative expenses, expert fees and the reasonable legal and other costs of the parties, and the final award decides who bears them. In doing so the tribunal may take into account the extent to which each party conducted the arbitration in an expeditious and cost-effective manner.[1] Procedural obstruction is therefore paid for at the end.

Settling an ICC arbitration

Most ICC cases that settle do so after the file reaches the tribunal. Article 36 provides that, if the parties settle and request it, and the tribunal agrees, the settlement is recorded in an award made by consent of the parties.[1] In 2025 the ICC Court approved 607 awards, of which 45 were by consent.[5] Bangladeshi law supports the same outcome. Section 22 of the Arbitration Act 2001 allows a tribunal to use mediation or conciliation with the parties' agreement, to record a settlement as an award on agreed terms, and gives that award the same status and effect as any other award.[7]

A consent award is usually better than a private settlement agreement: it is scrutinised by the ICC Court, enforceable as an award in Bangladesh and abroad, and harder for a state counterparty's successors to reopen. Draft it with precise payment dates, currency, default interest and costs, and obtain any government approval needed to pay before signing.

ICC arbitration Bangladesh lessons from Saipem and Smith Cogeneration

Two cases dominate how foreign parties view any ICC arbitration Bangladesh state entities are involved in. Both turned on what happened outside the tribunal.

Saipem: court interference at the seat

Saipem, an Italian contractor, had a construction contract with Petrobangla providing for ICC arbitration seated in Dhaka. After the ICC tribunal refused several of Petrobangla's procedural requests, Petrobangla obtained an order from a Dhaka court under the Arbitration Act 1940 revoking the tribunal's authority. The tribunal continued and ruled for Saipem, and the High Court Division then held that, because the tribunal's authority had been revoked, the award was a nullity: "A non-existent award can neither be set aside nor can it be enforced."[9]

Saipem then brought an ICSID claim under the Italy–Bangladesh investment treaty. On 30 June 2009 the tribunal held that the courts had abused their supervisory jurisdiction, that Bangladesh had breached Article II(1) of the New York Convention, and that the courts' actions were tantamount to an expropriation of Saipem's residual contractual rights as crystallised in the ICC award.[9] The tribunal awarded US$6.30 million against a claim of US$12.50 million.[8]

What has changed since Saipem

The legal ground has shifted. The 2001 Act replaced the 1940 Act and section 7 now bars any court from hearing proceedings on matters covered by an arbitration agreement except as the Act provides.[7] Section 14 lets the parties agree a challenge procedure, which the ICC Rules supply, and section 14(6) requires the tribunal to continue if a challenge fails.[7] Recourse against the award itself is confined to sections 42 and 43. A Saipem-style revocation should not be possible under the current Act, but foreign parties still price the memory of it into seat negotiations.

Smith Cogeneration: the cost of not taking part

The second case is a warning to Bangladeshi parties. In October 1997 the government signed contracts with an affiliate of US-based Smith Cogeneration for a 100 MW plant at Haripur and cancelled them in February 1999. On legal advice, the Power Development Board did not pay its US$60,000 share of the ICC advance, and on 30 October 2003 the tribunal ordered it to pay US$13.06 million plus four per cent annual interest.[10]

The company pursued enforcement in the United States, Scotland, Switzerland and Dhaka. In May 2024 a US District Court issued a revised ruling for US$31.71 million, and in October 2024 arrest warrants were issued against the Finance Adviser and the Bangladesh Bank Governor during meetings in Washington; they were suspended on appeal, and the court accepted out-of-court mediation. The parties settled at US$20 million, signed on 28 April 2025, and the Board paid Tk 2.45 billion on 23 May 2025.[10]

Lessons for both sides

• Participate: a default award is still an award. Pay the advance, appoint an arbitrator and defend on the merits.[3] [10]
• Challenge through the Act: objections to the tribunal belong in the ICC challenge procedure and, after the award, in sections 42 and 43, not in a parallel suit.[7]
• Remember the treaty layer: where a foreign investor is protected by an investment treaty, court action that frustrates an ICC award can create a second, state-level liability.[9]
• Settle early: interest and enforcement costs compound. A settlement in 2004 would have cost a fraction of the 2025 payment.[10]

Enforcing ICC awards in Bangladesh

Bangladesh acceded to the New York Convention on 6 May 1992, with effect from 4 August 1992, and made no reservations.[11] How an ICC award is enforced depends on where the arbitration was seated, not on the ICC's involvement.

Dhaka-seated ICC awards

The Arbitration Act 2001 applies in full where the place of arbitration is in Bangladesh.[7] A Dhaka-seated ICC award is therefore a Bangladeshi award. Once the sixty-day period for a setting-aside application has expired, or an application has been refused, section 44 provides that the award is enforced under the Code of Civil Procedure as if it were a decree of the court within whose local limits it was finally made and signed.[7] Our analysis of enforcement of arbitral awards in Bangladesh explains the execution process.

Foreign-seated ICC awards

Under section 3(2), sections 45 to 47 apply even where the seat is outside Bangladesh.[7] Section 45 makes a foreign award binding and enforceable by execution by the District Judge's Court exercising jurisdiction in Dhaka, as if it were a decree. The application must be accompanied by the original award or an authenticated copy, the original arbitration agreement or a certified copy, and evidence that the award is a foreign award, with certified translations where required.[7]

Section 46 permits refusal only on the New York Convention grounds, including incapacity, invalid agreement, lack of proper notice, excess of mandate, irregular composition or procedure, an award not yet binding or set aside at the seat, non-arbitrability and conflict with the public policy of Bangladesh.[7] If a setting-aside application is pending at the seat, the court may adjourn and order the award debtor to give suitable security.[7] Limitation, documents and recent case law are covered in our guide to foreign arbitral award enforcement in Bangladesh.

Enforcing ICC awards abroad against Bangladeshi parties

Where a Bangladeshi debtor has assets abroad, an award creditor can enforce in any New York Convention state. Smith Cogeneration shows how far that can reach: enforcement in Washington produced a judgment, depositions and, ultimately, payment.[10] In Saipem, by contrast, the ICSID tribunal found enforcement abroad unrealistic because Petrobangla had no assets outside Bangladesh.[9] Asset mapping should start before the Request is filed.

ICC Bangladesh: the national committee and its role

The International Chamber of Commerce Bangladesh (ICC-B) was founded in 1994 and is part of the global ICC network. When it marked its 30th anniversary in December 2024, its President was Mahbubur Rahman, and its members took part in the ICC Banking Commission and in work on ICC rules and standards.[14] ICC-B does not administer arbitrations. Every ICC arbitration, wherever seated, is administered by the ICC Court and its Secretariat.[1]

National committees do have a formal place in arbitrator appointments. Article 14(3) of the 2026 Rules provides that when the ICC Court appoints an arbitrator, it requests a proposal from an ICC National Committee or Group it considers appropriate.[1] Where the Court is appointing a sole arbitrator or president in a case with a Bangladeshi party, the nationality of the parties will usually point it elsewhere for neutrality. For a party's own nominee, ICC-B's network is a practical source of Bangladeshi arbitrators familiar with ICC procedure. Domestic disputes that do not need an international institution can go to the Bangladesh International Arbitration Centre.

Drafting an ICC clause for a Bangladeshi contract

The ICC's standard clause is short, and that is a strength. For contracts with a Bangladeshi party, five additions do most of the work, and our guide to arbitration clauses in Bangladesh covers drafting in more depth.

• Seat: choose it expressly. A Dhaka seat brings section 7A interim relief and High Court Division supervision; a foreign seat brings a neutral court but no Bangladeshi interim relief before enforcement.[6] [7]
• Number of arbitrators: state it, or accept the sole-arbitrator default.[1]
• Language: specify English. Otherwise the tribunal decides, considering the language of the contract.[1]
• Edition of the Rules: leave the reference general to obtain the 2026 Rules, or name an edition deliberately.[1]
• Expedited procedure: decide whether to opt out; for a contract signed from 1 June 2026 it applies up to US$4 million.[1]

Representation is flexible. A party may be represented by a lawyer or another person of its choice, and a lawyer need not be admitted to the Bangladesh Bar.[6]

Running an ICC arbitration Bangladesh dispute: a practical sequence

The order in which a party acts often decides the cost and the outcome more than the merits do. The sequence below reflects the 2026 Rules and the Bangladeshi enforcement framework.

Swipe or scroll →

For state-owned entities

Government-owned companies face extra steps: board and ministry approvals to appoint counsel, foreign-currency approvals to pay the advance and, later, approvals to pay an award or settlement. Map those approvals on day one. Smith Cogeneration's payment needed a policy-level decision by the Chief Adviser, Finance Division involvement and a choice between treasury funding and the Board's own funds.[10] Delays at that stage compound interest that the award already carries.

Bangladeshi parties will increasingly meet the 2026 Rules in new disputes, while pending cases run their course under the 2021 edition. TRW advises on ICC clauses, Dhaka and foreign-seated ICC proceedings, interim relief, settlement and enforcement through our international arbitration practice and construction and project disputes team. Parties weighing Singapore as an alternative can compare our guide to SIAC arbitration for Bangladeshi parties, and the wider institutional and seat choices are set out in our guide to international commercial arbitration in Bangladesh.

Frequently asked questions

Is there an ICC 2026 edition of the Arbitration Rules?

Yes. The 2026 ICC Rules of Arbitration entered into force on 1 June 2026 and apply to arbitrations commenced on or after that date, unless the parties agreed to an earlier version.[1]

Do the 2021 ICC Rules still apply to any cases?

Yes. Arbitrations commenced before 1 June 2026 continue under the 2021 Rules, including their Terms of Reference requirement.[1] [2]

Are Terms of Reference still required in ICC arbitration?

Not under the 2026 Rules. The tribunal must instead hold an initial case management conference within 30 days of receiving the file, and new claims after it need the tribunal's authorisation.[1] [2]

What is the expedited procedure threshold?

US$4 million for arbitration agreements concluded on or after 1 June 2026, US$3 million for agreements from 1 January 2021 to before 1 June 2026, and US$2 million for agreements from 1 March 2017 to before 1 January 2021.[1]

How much does it cost to start an ICC arbitration?

The claimant pays a non-refundable US$5,000 with the Request. A provisional advance and then a full advance on costs follow, calculated on the amount in dispute and normally shared equally.[3]

What happens if the Bangladeshi party does not pay its share of the advance?

The other party may be invited to pay it and the case proceeds. In Smith Cogeneration, the Power Development Board did not pay its share and the tribunal ruled without it.[3] [10]

Can parties exclude setting aside of a Dhaka-seated ICC award?

No. The ICC waiver of recourse operates only where valid, and the Arbitration Act 2001 contains no provision allowing parties to exclude the section 43 grounds.[1] [6]

Which court enforces a foreign-seated ICC award in Bangladesh?

The District Judge's Court exercising jurisdiction in Dhaka, under sections 45 and 46 of the Arbitration Act 2001.[7]

Can a settlement be turned into an ICC award?

Yes. Under Article 36, if the parties request it and the tribunal agrees, the settlement is recorded as an award by consent. Section 22 of the 2001 Act gives an award on agreed terms the same effect as any other award.[1] [7]

Does ICC Bangladesh administer arbitrations?

No. ICC Bangladesh is the national committee founded in 1994; ICC arbitrations are administered exclusively by the ICC International Court of Arbitration.[1] [14]