Key Takeaways from the 2025 LCIA & ICC Arbitration Statistics

Prepared by Tahmidur Remura Wahid (TRW) Law Firm — Dhaka • Dubai • London

Executive snapshot

The LCIA and ICC 2024 statistics confirm what many in-house teams already feel on the ground: arbitration keeps getting more international, more state-involved, and more sector-concentrated (construction/energy for ICC; transport/commodities and finance for LCIA). Diversity is improving (unevenly), expedited tools are widely available (sparingly granted), and London continues to punch above its weight as a seat, even as UAE consolidates its place among top venues in ICC practice.

This note distils the headline numbers and—more importantly—what they mean for drafting, budgeting, strategy, and enforcement. If you want a quick read-across to your dispute or a redline of your arbitration clause suite, start here: International Arbitration — TRW or Contact TRW Law Firm.

LCIA 2025: what changed, what matters

Caseload & internationality

• 362 new referrals (down slightly from 377 in 2023), in line with post-COVID normalisation.
• 95% of cases had at least one international party; 75% were exclusively international.
• Parties hailed from 101 jurisdictions; 85% were non-UK.
• 21 seats across 15 jurisdictions, applying 35 substantive laws—yet London remained dominant (~89% of seats), and English law governed ~78% of cases.

States & emerging markets

• States/SOEs in ~14% of cases (record high).
• Surge from Africa (~17%) of parties, up from 8% (with Kenya ~7.7%).
• Softer participation from Western Europe and MENA versus 2023.

Sectors

• Transport & commodities remained prominent albeit down to ~29%.
• Banking/finance rose to ~17%; energy/resources about ~10%.
• Construction (~8%) and technology (~6%) steady.

Tribunal formation & diversity

• Three-member tribunals ~54%, but trendline shows more sole arbitrators year-over-year.
• 55% of all arbitrators British, yet ~59% of LCIA Court appointments were non-British—evidence of a genuinely global bench.
• Women ~33% of all arbitrators; LCIA appointments ~45% women (party appointments lower at ~21%).
• Expedited formation applications were rare and seldom granted.

TRW read-across: LCIA remains the natural home for English-law finance, commodities, and transport disputes, and a credible forum for SOE and African-facing matters. Expect strong case management, robust procedural autonomy, and reliable tribunals—especially where a London seat and English law fit your enforcement plan.

ICC 2024: scale, spread, and sector weight

Caseload & value

• 841 new cases (831 under ICC Rules); 1,789 pending at year-end.
• USD 354bn total value—an all-time high.
• 2,392 new parties from 136 jurisdictions; cross-border disputes ~69%.
• The ICC ADR Centre logged 61 new referrals (mediation/amicable procedures).

Seats & geography

• Proceedings in 107 cities across 62 countries/territories.
• Most-chosen seats remained London, Paris, Geneva, New York, with UAE joining the front rank—an important signal for Middle East-linked deals.

States/SOEs & regions

• 45 states and 143 SOEs in ~159 cases (~19% of new filings, up from ~16%).
• Most frequent party origins included USA, Brazil, Spain, Mexico, Italy, PRC (incl. HK), Germany, Türkiye, France, UAE.
• Greater visibility from Africa, MENA, LatAm, Central Asia, especially in infrastructure, energy, extractives.

Sectors & procedure

• Construction/engineering (~23.2%) and energy (~20.5%) together ~44% of the caseload.
• Transport, finance/insurance, telecoms, and health/pharma/cosmetics followed.
• Diversity: Men still ~71.4% overall, but the ICC Court appointed ~46% women (up from ~41%); more women serving as sole/presiding arbitrators (~43%).
• Emergency Arbitrator: 17 applications (3 granted, 2 partial, 12 dismissed).
• Expedited Procedure: 152 new cases (mostly automatic by amount; 5 opt-ins), aiming for awards within ~6 months.

TRW read-across: ICC is the global volume leader, the default for mega construction/energy and state-heavy work. It offers unmatched institutional infrastructure, deep secretariat experience, and strong global reach across seats, languages, and industries.

LCIA vs ICC — how to choose (a practical matrix)

Dimension	LCIA (2024 picture)	ICC (2024 picture)	TRW guidance
Use cases	Finance, commodities, transport; English-law deals; tight case management	Large, multi-party, construction/energy, state/SOE; global sprawl	Match forum to contract DNA and asset map
Seat gravity	London dominant (and stable)	London/Paris/Geneva/NY + UAE rising	Seat = curial law & court support: choose deliberately
States/SOEs	~14%	~19%	Both credible. ICC often preferred in complex state projects
Emerging markets	Strong Africa growth (notably Kenya)	Broad uplift across MENA/LatAm/Asia	Consider language, sector experts, and enforcement routes
Diversity trend	LCIA Court appointments notably global; women ~45% of LCIA’s own picks	ICC Court pushed women to ~46%; more women as chairs/soles	Tribunal quality is high at both; party picks still drive outcomes
Expedited/EA	Expedited formation rarely granted	Expedited used frequently by amount; EA available but strictly filtered	Don’t “assume” fast-track—build eligibility into drafting/strategy

What this means for your contracts (and your budget)

1) Seat selection is strategy, not admin

Seat = curial law + supervisory court. If receivables or banks sit in Dubai or London, consider those seats—even if your project site is elsewhere. We map seats to enforcement corridors as standard. See International Arbitration — TRW.

2) Draft for complexity you actually have

• Multi-party? Enable joinder and consolidation.
• State/SOE counterparties? Add execution immunity waivers (to the extent permitted) and define commercial-use asset paths.
• Need speed? Put expedited and document-only options in the clause and ensure amount thresholds won’t disqualify you.

3) Tribunal composition with intention

• Smaller, documents-driven disputes: sole arbitrator may be optimal.
• High stakes/technical: three-member tribunal, with targeted profile for the chair (industry + public law exposure for SOE or treaty-flavoured issues).

4) Diversity that works for you

Both institutions are moving the needle, particularly via institutional appointments. If diversity matters to your board (or sector optics), reflect it in list protocols and chair profiles—without compromising experience.

5) Expect scrutiny on emergency relief

EA relief remains exceptional. Prepare asset maps, bank details, status-quo evidence, and show real urgency. Otherwise, use robust interim applications once the tribunal is formed—or court relief preserved by clause.

Sector notes (2024 patterns you can plan around)

• Construction & energy (ICC-heavy): Expect document-intensive schedules, multiple experts (delay, quantum, technical), and tight case management. Draft for consolidation across EPC, subcontracts, and guarantees.
• Transport & commodities (LCIA-heavy): Speed and documentary rigour win. Consider sole arbitrators and document-only tracks for straightforward quality/quantity or shipment disputes.
• Banking/finance (rising at LCIA): Align arbitration with security packages and governing law; ensure guarantor/affiliate joinder is explicit to avoid non-signatory fights.
• Tech/health/pharma: Protect data/IP with confidentiality rings, secure e-bundles, and remote-hearing protocols from day one.

TRW model clause pointers (ready to tailor)

• Institution: choose LCIA for English-law finance/commodities/transport or ICC for mega construction/energy/state matters.
• Seat: pick London, Dubai, Singapore, or Paris to match your enforcement corridor.
• Tribunal: one or three, with chair profile pre-framed.
• Expedited: opt-in language where thresholds may be exceeded but speed still matters.
• Interim measures: preserve court relief without waiving arbitration; consider Emergency Arbitrator where institutionally robust.
• Joinder/consolidation: explicit, cross-referenced across the contract stack.
• Electronic service: authorise email/portal with transmission logs—vital to defeat “no notice” defences later.

We can deliver a same-day redline for live deals: Contact TRW Law Firm.

For in-house: a 60-second checklist

• [ ] Institution and seat aligned to asset/payor geography.
• [ ] Tribunal size chosen for cost vs. complexity.
• [ ] Joinder/consolidation across affiliates/guarantees.
• [ ] Expedited/EA rights fit your dispute profile.
• [ ] Immunity waivers (where relevant) + commercial-use execution path.
• [ ] Electronic service authorised; time zones clear.
• [ ] Confidentiality/data protocols for sensitive sectors.
• [ ] Budget reflects institutional/tribunal fees and likely expert needs.

How TRW turns forum choice into leverage

We connect Dhaka–Dubai–London into one enforcement strategy. That means your clause, your tribunal formation, your interim relief, and your post-award play are all designed with collectability in mind. If you’re choosing between LCIA and ICC, we’ll show you the seat-specific pros and the banking/receivable realities for your counterparty—before you sign.

Begin with a quick consult: International Arbitration — TRW or Contact TRW Law Firm.

TRW Contact & Offices

Tahmidur Remura Wahid (TRW) Law Firm — International Arbitration & Enforcement
Dhaka • Dubai • London

Start a matter or request a clause audit: Contact TRW Law Firm

Internal links only have been used to maintain site integrity and user experience.