ICC DOCDEX Rules
- Select a language
Go directly to:
ICC DOCDEX is a dispute resolution procedure specifically designed for the world of trade finance, whereby a panel of three independent and impartial experts render a decision on a dispute arising out of a trade finance instrument, undertaking or agreement.
This rapid, document based procedure offers an attractive alternative to costly and protracted litigation. DOCDEX is administered exclusively by the ICC International Centre for ADR in accordance with the ICC DOCDEX Rules set out in this booklet, which enter into force on 1 May 2015.
Since 1997 the ICC DOCDEX Rules have provided a trusted dispute resolution system for documentary credits incorporating ICC banking rules. In 2002 the Rules were extended to guarantees and collections also incorporating ICC banking rules. The 2015 revision further extends their scope to a wider range of trade finance instruments, including transactions or aspects of transactions not covered by existing ICC banking rules, such as trade loans, syndications, negotiable instruments, risk purchase agreements, conflicts of priority and fraud in letters of credit. This change will enable disputants previously left outside the ambit of DOCDEX to benefit from the service.
Speed has always been a hallmark of the DOCDEX process: decisions are reached within thirty days of the experts’ receiving the file. A new and original feature of the 2015 revision is the requirement that filings be made in electronic form using standard templates downloadable from the ICC website. This change will help to streamline case administration and further accelerate the proceedings. Specimens of these forms are included in this booklet after the Rules.
As a joint product of the ICC Banking Commission and ICC Dispute Resolution Services, DOCDEX capitalizes on ICC’s expertise and experience in both fields. While retaining the traditional features of DOCDEX, the 2015 Rules are attuned to best professional practices and include safeguards to ensure the competence, independence, impartiality and availability of experts, quality assurance through the scrutiny of decisions, confidentiality, cost transparency and procedural efficiency.