Fast-Track Arbitration under ISTAC Rules: Procedure, Time Limits and Advantages

Fast-track arbitration under ISTAC Rules provides businesses with a simplified and accelerated procedure for resolving commercial disputes through a binding arbitral award.

Traditional arbitration can be faster than court litigation, but complex arbitration proceedings may still involve several rounds of submissions, extensive document production, multiple witnesses, expert reports and lengthy hearings. These procedural stages may be disproportionate where the amount in dispute is relatively limited or the dispute can be resolved principally through contractual documents.

The Istanbul Arbitration Centre, commonly referred to as ISTAC, offers a separate fast-track procedure designed to resolve smaller-value disputes within a substantially shorter timeframe.

As of 6 August 2026, ISTAC’s official public guidance states that the Fast-Track Arbitration Rules apply to disputes in which the value of the claims does not exceed TRY 5,000,000. The procedure is conducted by a sole arbitrator and is designed to produce a final, binding and enforceable award within three months.

The procedure may be particularly suitable for disputes involving:

• Unpaid invoices;
• Supply and distribution agreements;
• Construction payment claims;
• Commercial lease obligations;
• Service agreements;
• Technology and software contracts;
• Smaller shareholder claims;
• International sales;
• Logistics and transportation;
• Agency and commission payments.

The principal advantages are speed, predictability, reduced tribunal costs and procedural simplicity.

These advantages do not mean that fast-track arbitration is an informal negotiation or summary debt-collection procedure. The sole arbitrator must still respect equality, independence, impartiality and each party’s right to present its case. The award remains subject to the applicable Turkish arbitration law, limited setting-aside procedures and the rules governing recognition and enforcement.

This article explains the scope of ISTAC fast-track arbitration, commencement of proceedings, appointment of the sole arbitrator, procedural deadlines, document-only decisions, hearings, costs, interim measures, setting-aside proceedings and enforcement of fast-track awards.

What Is Fast-Track Arbitration?

Fast-track arbitration is an expedited form of arbitration in which the ordinary procedural timetable is shortened and the case is generally determined by one arbitrator.

It differs from ordinary arbitration primarily through:

• Shorter time limits;
• A sole arbitrator;
• Full submissions at the beginning of the case;
• Limited additional pleadings;
• Greater reliance on documents;
• The possibility of deciding without an oral hearing;
• A three-month award period.

ISTAC describes its fast-track mechanism as a simplified and expeditious procedure intended for the final resolution of lower-value disputes. Its current public page states that domestic and foreign parties may obtain a final award from a sole arbitrator within three months where the applicable monetary condition is satisfied.

The purpose is not merely to perform the same ordinary arbitration more quickly. The procedure requires the parties and arbitrator to organise the entire case differently.

The claimant should present its complete legal and factual case when commencing arbitration. The respondent must respond rapidly and submit its supporting evidence within the shortened defence period.

The parties should therefore begin preparing their documents, witness evidence, legal submissions and damages calculations before the arbitration is formally commenced.

The Difference between Fast-Track and Emergency Arbitration

Fast-track arbitration should not be confused with emergency arbitration.

A fast-track proceeding determines the merits of the commercial dispute and results in a final arbitral award.

Emergency arbitration deals only with urgent interim protection before the ordinary tribunal has been constituted. An emergency arbitrator may, for example, preserve evidence, protect confidential information or temporarily restrict a contractual action.

Under the ISTAC system, an emergency arbitrator is appointed within two working days and ordinarily renders a decision within seven days. The emergency decision is temporary and may later be modified by the ordinary tribunal.

Fast-track arbitration, by contrast, produces the final decision on liability, payment, damages or another substantive remedy.

A party may use both mechanisms in the same dispute. It may seek urgent emergency protection first and then pursue the merits through fast-track arbitration.

When Do the Fast-Track Arbitration Rules Apply?

ISTAC’s current public guidance states that the Fast-Track Arbitration Rules apply where the value of the claims does not exceed TRY 5,000,000.

The monetary threshold should always be checked immediately before commencing arbitration because ISTAC may update the applicable threshold or procedural documents.

The published structure of the Fast-Track Arbitration Rules determines eligibility by reference to the claims and any counterclaims existing when arbitration is commenced. The Rules also contemplate that the parties may agree to use fast-track arbitration even where the amount exceeds the ordinary threshold.

This creates three possible routes.

Automatic Application within the Monetary Threshold

Where the amount in dispute falls within the current threshold and the parties have selected ISTAC arbitration without excluding fast-track proceedings, the expedited rules may apply automatically.

Voluntary Application above the Threshold

The parties may expressly agree that the Fast-Track Arbitration Rules will apply to a higher-value dispute.

This can be done in the arbitration clause or after the dispute arises.

A post-dispute agreement may be useful where:

• The issues are legally straightforward;
• The evidence is limited;
• Both parties require a rapid decision;
• The amount exceeds the threshold only slightly;
• The commercial relationship must continue.

Exclusion of Fast-Track Arbitration

The parties may agree that the expedited procedure will not apply even where the dispute falls below the threshold.

Exclusion may be appropriate where the parties expect:

• Complex technical evidence;
• Multiple contracts;
• Several parties;
• Extensive document production;
• Numerous witnesses;
• A need for three arbitrators;
• Difficult jurisdictional questions.

The exclusion should be written clearly in the arbitration clause.

What Happens if the Amount Increases during Arbitration?

A claim may increase after commencement because:

• Additional invoices become due;
• Damages continue to accrue;
• The claimant revises its calculation;
• The respondent files a counterclaim;
• Interest or contractual penalties increase the amount.

The structure of ISTAC’s published Fast-Track Rules indicates that the procedure may continue even where claims or counterclaims later exceed the applicable monetary threshold, unless the parties have agreed otherwise. The Rules also permit the Board to decide that fast-track proceedings should not apply in light of the facts and circumstances when a timely objection is submitted.

The procedural consequences should therefore be addressed as early as possible.

A party expecting a substantial counterclaim should not wait until the sole arbitrator is appointed before raising an objection to the expedited procedure.

Can the Parties Use Fast-Track Arbitration for International Disputes?

Yes.

ISTAC fast-track arbitration is available to both Turkish and foreign parties. The legal seat may be in Türkiye or another jurisdiction if the arbitration agreement and applicable rules permit it.

ISTAC expressly states that its fast-track procedure is available to domestic and foreign parties.

An international fast-track arbitration may concern:

• A Turkish exporter and foreign buyer;
• A foreign supplier and Turkish distributor;
• An international construction subcontract;
• A cross-border software licence;
• A foreign shareholder and Turkish company;
• International transportation or logistics.

The parties should determine:

• The legal seat;
• Arbitration language;
• Governing law;
• Currency of the claim;
• Location of assets;
• Intended enforcement countries.

These choices may affect the procedural law, court assistance, setting-aside proceedings and enforcement of the award.

The Arbitration Agreement

Fast-track proceedings require a valid arbitration agreement.

A suitable clause should make clear that disputes will be resolved under the ISTAC Arbitration Rules. The official ISTAC model clause provides that disputes arising out of or connected with the contract shall be finally settled through arbitration under the Istanbul Arbitration Centre Arbitration Rules. ISTAC also recommends that parties specify the place of arbitration, language, number of arbitrators and law applicable to the merits.

Where the parties specifically want expedited treatment, they may state:

“Any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall be finally resolved by arbitration administered by the Istanbul Arbitration Centre in accordance with the ISTAC Fast-Track Arbitration Rules.”

Where the parties want the rules to apply only below the current threshold, they may rely on the institutional framework but should verify the wording against the version in force when signing.

A defective clause may create preliminary disputes concerning:

• Whether ISTAC was selected;
• Whether fast-track rules apply;
• Whether the claim exceeds the threshold;
• Whether the clause requires three arbitrators;
• Whether another institution was intended;
• Whether court jurisdiction was also preserved.

Fast-Track Arbitration and the Number of Arbitrators

The default decision-maker under the fast-track procedure is a sole arbitrator.

The use of one arbitrator is central to the procedure’s speed and cost efficiency. Coordinating three arbitrators would generally require more time for appointments, hearings, deliberations and preparation of the award.

The published Fast-Track Arbitration Rules provide that disputes subject to the expedited procedure are resolved by a sole arbitrator unless the parties have agreed otherwise.

Parties should avoid contradictory drafting.

For example, the following clause creates uncertainty:

“Disputes shall be resolved under the ISTAC Fast-Track Arbitration Rules by three arbitrators.”

The parties may have agreed deliberately to three arbitrators, but the arrangement undermines one of the principal features of the expedited procedure.

A better approach is to use a sole arbitrator for qualifying fast-track claims and reserve a three-member tribunal for disputes above an agreed value.

Commencement of Fast-Track Arbitration

Fast-track arbitration begins with a complete statement of claim submitted to the ISTAC Secretariat.

ISTAC’s current filing guideline instructs the claimant to submit:

• Its full statement of claim;
• The arbitration clause;
• Supporting annexes;
• Proof of payment of the registration fee;
• Its proposed or designated sole arbitrator.

The claimant should not submit a short notice stating only that additional details will follow later.

The statement of claim should ordinarily contain:

• Names and contact details of the parties;
• Relevant contractual relationship;
• Factual background;
• Legal grounds;
• Relief requested;
• Amount claimed;
• Interest;
• Costs;
• Arbitration agreement;
• Seat, language and governing-law proposals;
• Supporting documents and evidence.

The published rules require the claimant to explain the subject matter and circumstances of the dispute, state the facts and legal arguments supporting the requested relief, quantify monetary claims or estimate the value of non-monetary claims, and submit the documents needed to prove its case.

Importance of a Complete Initial Submission

A complete initial filing is necessary because the entire arbitration is designed to conclude within three months after transmission of the file to the sole arbitrator.

A claimant that submits an incomplete case may later face:

• Refusal of late evidence;
• Insufficient time for expert work;
• Reduced opportunity to amend claims;
• Procedural objections;
• Adverse cost consequences.

Before filing, the claimant should create:

• A factual chronology;
• An indexed document set;
• A calculation of damages;
• A list of witnesses;
• A clear legal theory;
• An enforcement assessment.

Fast-track arbitration rewards preparation. It is less suitable for a claimant that intends to investigate its own case after proceedings begin.

Registration Fee and Advance on Costs

The claimant must pay the applicable ISTAC registration fee when filing.

As of 6 August 2026, ISTAC’s current fee scale lists a registration fee of TRY 1,000. The same scale separately calculates institutional administrative expenses and sole-arbitrator fees according to the amount in dispute.

The registration fee is not the total cost of arbitration.

The parties may also be required to pay an advance covering:

• Administrative expenses;
• Arbitrator remuneration;
• Tribunal expenses;
• Other anticipated procedural costs.

For claims up to TRY 1,000,000, the current ISTAC scale lists administrative costs at 1.6% and a sole-arbitrator fee at 5%, subject to the published minimum fee. For claims between TRY 1,000,001 and TRY 5,000,000, fixed amounts and additional percentages apply.

Legal fees, party-appointed experts, translations and hearing expenses are separate.

The Respondent’s Statement of Defence

The respondent must act quickly.

ISTAC’s official guideline states that the respondent submits its statement of defence and supporting evidence within 15 days after notification of the claimant’s statement of claim.

The defence should include:

• Responses to factual allegations;
• Legal objections;
• Jurisdictional objections;
• Counterclaims;
• Set-off defences;
• Supporting documents;
• Witness or expert evidence;
• Responses concerning the seat, language and arbitrator.

The published rules also require objections concerning the existence, validity or scope of the arbitration agreement to be raised in the defence.

A respondent should therefore contact arbitration counsel immediately after receiving the claim.

A strategy based on waiting until the ordinary response period used in court litigation may result in missed deadlines.

Objection to the Application of Fast-Track Rules

A party may believe that the dispute is unsuitable for expedited arbitration.

The published rules require an objection concerning the application of the Fast-Track Arbitration Rules to be submitted to the Secretariat within five days after notification commencing the arbitration, where the objection is raised before selection or appointment of the sole arbitrator. The ISTAC Board decides the objection.

An objection may be based on:

• The amount exceeding the applicable threshold;
• Complex multiparty issues;
• Numerous contracts;
• Extensive expert evidence;
• Serious jurisdictional disputes;
• Need for a three-member tribunal;
• Inability to complete necessary document production within three months.

The objecting party should provide specific reasons.

A general assertion that the dispute is “complex” may not be persuasive unless supported by an explanation of the evidence, parties, contracts and procedural steps required.

Appointment of the Sole Arbitrator

The parties are ordinarily given an opportunity to agree on the sole arbitrator.

The published Fast-Track Arbitration Rules provide a 15-day period from notification of the statement of claim for the parties to select the sole arbitrator jointly. If they fail to agree, the ISTAC Board appoints the arbitrator.

A candidate should be:

• Independent;
• Impartial;
• Immediately available;
• Fluent in the arbitration language;
• Experienced in the relevant legal or commercial field;
• Capable of issuing an award within the accelerated timetable.

Availability is particularly important.

An arbitrator who has suitable expertise but cannot review the file promptly or schedule a hearing within the three-month period may not be an appropriate choice.

Independence and Impartiality

The expedited nature of the case does not reduce arbitrator-independence requirements.

An arbitrator should disclose circumstances that may create justified doubts regarding impartiality or independence.

Potential conflicts may involve:

• Prior relationships with a party;
• Work for a corporate affiliate;
• Relationships with counsel;
• Financial interests;
• Repeated appointments;
• Prior knowledge of the dispute.

A late challenge can disrupt the compressed timetable significantly. The parties should perform conflict checks as soon as a candidate is proposed or appointed.

Procedural Timetable

The sole arbitrator must establish the procedural timetable rapidly.

Under the published Fast-Track Arbitration Rules, the arbitrator must consult the parties and establish the timetable within seven days after being selected or appointed. The timetable addresses any further submissions, whether a hearing will be held and other necessary procedural matters.

The timetable may include:

• Claimant’s reply;
• Respondent’s rejoinder;
• Limited document requests;
• Expert reports;
• Witness statements;
• Hearing date;
• Post-hearing submissions;
• Closing of proceedings.

The arbitrator should permit each party a meaningful opportunity to present its case while preventing unnecessary procedural expansion.

Are Additional Submissions Allowed?

The Fast-Track Arbitration Rules do not necessarily prohibit all additional pleadings.

The sole arbitrator determines whether further submissions are needed through the procedural timetable.

A simple invoice dispute may require only:

• Statement of claim;
• Statement of defence;
• Final award.

A more complex case may require:

• One reply;
• One rejoinder;
• A short expert submission;
• A focused hearing.

The arbitrator should consider whether an additional round is necessary for due process rather than allowing it automatically.

The parties should use concise submissions and avoid repeating arguments already presented.

Document-Only Arbitration

One of the most important features of fast-track arbitration is the ability to decide the case without an oral hearing.

ISTAC’s official guideline identifies two possibilities: holding a hearing or evaluating the dispute solely on the basis of documents.

The published rules state that, unless a hearing is considered necessary, the sole arbitrator may decide the case on the documentary record after consulting the parties. The arbitrator may request additional information or documents required to resolve the dispute.

A document-only procedure may be suitable where:

• The contract is clear;
• Delivery is undisputed;
• Invoices and payment records are available;
• No witness credibility issue exists;
• Damages can be calculated from records;
• The parties agree on the material facts.

It may be unsuitable where:

• Fraud is alleged;
• Witness credibility is decisive;
• Technical experts disagree materially;
• Oral explanation is necessary;
• Important factual events are undocumented.

Right to Request a Hearing

The arbitrator should consult the parties before deciding whether the case will proceed on documents alone.

A party requesting a hearing should explain:

• Which witness must be heard;
• Which disputed fact requires oral testimony;
• Why documents are insufficient;
• How long the hearing will take;
• Why the hearing remains compatible with the expedited timetable.

A request for a hearing should not be made merely to delay the award.

Conversely, the arbitrator should not refuse a genuinely necessary hearing merely to preserve the appearance of speed. A serious denial of the right to present a case may later create setting-aside or enforcement risks.

Conduct of a Hearing

Where a hearing is required, the sole arbitrator controls its organisation and conduct.

The published rules provide for at least 15 days’ notice of the hearing date, time and location.

A fast-track hearing will ordinarily be shorter than a hearing in ordinary arbitration.

The arbitrator may:

• Limit opening statements;
• Impose time limits;
• Focus witness examination;
• Hear experts concurrently;
• Use electronic hearing bundles;
• Restrict repetitive questioning;
• Conduct the hearing remotely.

ISTAC’s Online Hearing Rules permit hearings through video conference or teleconference and allow the sole arbitrator to determine appropriate procedures after considering party participation and technical arrangements.

Remote hearings may reduce travel and venue costs, particularly where the parties or witnesses are located in different countries.

Evidence in Fast-Track Arbitration

The shortened timetable does not eliminate the need to prove the claim or defence.

Evidence may include:

• Contracts;
• Amendments;
• Invoices;
• Delivery records;
• Bank statements;
• Emails;
• Notices;
• Accounting documents;
• Photographs;
• Technical records;
• Witness statements;
• Expert reports.

The parties should avoid submitting large quantities of irrelevant material.

A focused evidentiary file should demonstrate:

• What obligation existed;
• What happened;
• Which evidence proves it;
• What remedy follows.

Extensive discovery-style document production is generally inconsistent with the purpose of a three-month procedure.

Expert Evidence

Expert evidence may be used where necessary, but its scope should be controlled carefully.

Suitable fast-track expert issues may include:

• A limited accounting calculation;
• Valuation of delivered goods;
• A short technical defect assessment;
• Interest calculation;
• Quantification of a defined delay.

Fast-track arbitration may be less suitable where the dispute requires:

• Several technical disciplines;
• Site inspections;
• Multiple expert meetings;
• Extensive forensic accounting;
• Large quantities of underlying data.

The parties may consider using one jointly appointed expert or narrowly defining the questions to reduce time and costs.

The Three-Month Time Limit

The sole arbitrator must ordinarily render the decision on the merits within three months after transmission of the file to the arbitrator.

This is the defining feature of ISTAC fast-track proceedings.

The three-month period does not necessarily begin when the claimant first emails the statement of claim. It begins when the file is transmitted to the appointed sole arbitrator.

The institutional and appointment stages occur before that point.

The parties should therefore distinguish between:

• Total time from filing to award;
• Three-month tribunal period after file transmission.

Award within One Month of Final Submission or Hearing

The published rules additionally state that the sole arbitrator should render the award no later than one month after the final submission or the last hearing, whichever occurs later.

The procedural timetable should be designed backward from these deadlines.

For example:

• Day 1: File transmitted;
• Day 7: Timetable established;
• Day 30: Final additional submissions;
• Day 45: Hearing;
• Day 75: Final award;
• Day 90: Absolute ordinary deadline.

The exact timetable depends on the case.

Can the Three-Month Period Be Extended?

Yes.

The published Fast-Track Arbitration Rules permit extension:

• By agreement of the parties; or
• By the ISTAC Board where necessary, upon the application of a party or the sole arbitrator.

An extension may be justified by:

• Complex jurisdictional issues;
• Serious illness;
• Replacement of the arbitrator;
• Unexpected expert evidence;
• Settlement discussions;
• Necessary court assistance;
• Procedural events beyond the parties’ control.

Extensions should remain exceptional.

Routine extensions would undermine the purpose of the expedited system.

Interim Measures during Fast-Track Arbitration

The need for urgent protection may arise even though the final award is expected within three months.

A party may seek:

• Preservation of evidence;
• Protection of confidential information;
• Suspension of a disputed transfer;
• Interim attachment;
• Temporary contractual performance;
• Preservation of goods.

Under International Arbitration Law No. 4686, a party may apply to a competent court for an interim injunction or interim attachment before or during arbitration without waiving the arbitration agreement. A tribunal may also grant interim protection within the limits of its consent-based authority.

Where the sole arbitrator has not yet been appointed, the party may consider ISTAC emergency arbitration.

Where the requested measure must bind a bank, registry, enforcement office or another third party, court relief will ordinarily be required.

Fast-Track Arbitration Costs

Fast-track arbitration may reduce costs in several ways:

• Only one arbitrator;
• Shorter duration;
• Fewer written submissions;
• Limited document production;
• Shorter or no hearing;
• Reduced travel;
• Earlier finality.

However, the procedure is not automatically inexpensive.

Legal costs may remain substantial where the case requires urgent preparation, translation or expert evidence.

The applicable ISTAC costs are calculated according to the institution’s current registration, administrative and arbitrator-fee scales.

The parties should budget for:

• Registration fee;
• Administrative expenses;
• Sole-arbitrator fee;
• Lawyers;
• Experts;
• Translations;
• Hearing expenses;
• Court applications;
• Enforcement.

Allocation of Costs

The final award may allocate arbitration costs between the parties.

Where Turkish International Arbitration Law No. 4686 applies, the statutory starting point is that the unsuccessful party bears the arbitration costs unless the parties agree otherwise. Where each party succeeds in part, costs are allocated according to relative success.

The arbitrator may also consider:

• Unreasonable claims;
• Procedural delay;
• Failure to comply with orders;
• Unnecessary evidence;
• Settlement conduct;
• Proportionality of legal expenses.

A party should submit an organised cost statement with supporting invoices and explanations.

The Fast-Track Award

The sole arbitrator’s award is final and binding between the parties under the arbitration framework. ISTAC’s official fast-track page states that the procedure produces a binding and enforceable award.

The award should identify:

• Parties;
• Arbitration agreement;
• Seat;
• Applicable law;
• Claims and defences;
• Reasoning;
• Operative relief;
• Principal amount;
• Interest;
• Costs;
• Date;
• Signature.

A fast award should not be an inadequately reasoned award.

The sole arbitrator must provide sufficient reasoning to show that the parties’ material claims and defences were considered.

Can the Award Be Appealed?

Arbitral awards are not generally subject to an ordinary appeal on the merits.

A court does not reconsider the case merely because one party believes that the arbitrator interpreted the contract incorrectly or evaluated the evidence differently.

However, a Turkish-seated award may be challenged through a limited setting-aside action.

The applicable regime depends on whether the arbitration is international under Law No. 4686 or domestic under the Code of Civil Procedure.

Setting Aside an International Fast-Track Award

Where the arbitration is governed by International Arbitration Law No. 4686, an action to set aside may be filed on limited grounds, including:

• Invalid arbitration agreement;
• Incapacity;
• Irregular tribunal appointment;
• Excess of jurisdiction;
• Serious procedural violation;
• Failure to respect equality;
• Non-arbitrability;
• Conflict with Turkish public policy.

The setting-aside process is not a full appeal.

Under Law No. 4686, filing a setting-aside action suspends enforcement of the international award during the statutory process.

Consequently, general descriptions stating that every ISTAC fast-track award is immediately executable should be read together with the arbitration law applicable to the particular seat and dispute.

Setting Aside a Domestic Fast-Track Award

A domestic Turkish arbitration may be governed by Articles 407 to 444 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Under Article 439, an action to set aside does not automatically suspend enforcement. The court may order a stay upon request where security covering the awarded money or property is provided. An appeal against the setting-aside judgment also does not automatically suspend execution.

This is an important distinction between domestic and international Turkish arbitration.

The parties should therefore identify the governing arbitration regime before making statements about immediate enforceability.

Enforcement outside Türkiye

Where the debtor’s assets are outside Türkiye, the successful party may seek recognition and enforcement in another country.

The New York Convention establishes common international standards for recognising arbitration agreements and enforcing foreign and non-domestic arbitral awards. It is designed to ensure that qualifying awards are generally capable of enforcement in contracting states without discrimination against foreign awards.

The award creditor will ordinarily need:

• The authenticated award;
• The arbitration agreement;
• Certified translations;
• Documents required under local procedural law.

The foreign court may refuse enforcement only on limited grounds under the applicable convention and national law.

Advantages of ISTAC Fast-Track Arbitration

Speed

The three-month tribunal deadline can provide a final decision substantially faster than ordinary litigation or full-scale arbitration.

Cost Predictability

The use of a sole arbitrator and institutional fee scales allows the parties to estimate tribunal and administrative expenses more reliably.

Procedural Simplicity

The procedure begins with full pleadings and uses a short defence period, limited additional submissions and focused evidence.

Document-Only Determination

Where no hearing is necessary, the dispute may be decided entirely on the documentary record.

Specialist Decision-Maker

The parties may select an arbitrator with experience in the relevant industry or contract type.

Confidentiality

Arbitration can provide a more private dispute-resolution framework than ordinary public court proceedings, subject to the arbitration agreement, ISTAC framework and applicable law.

International Enforcement

An award may be enforced internationally under the New York Convention where the relevant requirements are satisfied.

Potential Disadvantages

Fast-track arbitration is not ideal for every dispute.

Potential limitations include:

• Limited preparation time;
• Difficulty presenting extensive expert evidence;
• Reduced scope for document production;
• Pressure on witnesses and counsel;
• Dependence on one arbitrator;
• Less time to address complicated jurisdictional issues;
• Risk of extensions in unexpectedly complex cases.

The procedure may be unsuitable for:

• Major construction disputes;
• Complex M&A claims;
• Multiparty joint ventures;
• Large fraud investigations;
• Cases involving several foreign laws;
• Disputes requiring extensive technical testing;
• Claims involving hundreds of thousands of documents.

Speed should not be selected at the expense of a meaningful opportunity to present the case.

Sample ISTAC Fast-Track Arbitration Clause

“Any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement, including its formation, validity, interpretation, performance, breach or termination, shall be finally resolved by arbitration administered by the Istanbul Arbitration Centre in accordance with the ISTAC Fast-Track Arbitration Rules.

The seat of arbitration shall be Istanbul, Türkiye. The arbitration shall be conducted by a sole arbitrator. The language of arbitration shall be English. This Agreement and the arbitration agreement contained in this clause shall be governed by Turkish law.

The sole arbitrator may decide the dispute on the basis of documents unless an oral hearing is considered necessary to protect the parties’ right to be heard.

Nothing in this clause shall prevent a party from applying to an emergency arbitrator or a competent court for interim, conservatory or protective relief. Such an application shall not constitute a waiver of the arbitration agreement.”

Where the parties want the procedure only below a particular amount, they should add a carefully drafted monetary threshold.

Practical Checklist for Claimants

Before commencing fast-track arbitration, the claimant should confirm:

• A valid ISTAC arbitration agreement exists;
• Fast-track rules apply;
• The current monetary threshold is satisfied;
• The claim and interest are calculated;
• All supporting documents are collected;
• Witness evidence is available;
• Expert evidence can be prepared rapidly;
• The respondent’s address is correct;
• The registration fee can be paid;
• The sole-arbitrator proposal is ready;
• Interim protection is not required first;
• Assets exist for enforcement.

The claimant should treat the initial statement as its primary merits submission.

Practical Checklist for Respondents

Upon receiving a fast-track claim, the respondent should immediately:

• Record the notification date;
• Check the 15-day defence deadline;
• Examine the arbitration agreement;
• Review the monetary threshold;
• Decide whether to object within five days;
• Conduct arbitrator conflict checks;
• Collect documents;
• Identify counterclaims;
• Calculate set-off;
• Contact witnesses and experts;
• Consider interim relief;
• Prepare an enforcement-risk assessment.

Delay during the first week may be difficult to remedy later.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is ISTAC fast-track arbitration?

It is an expedited arbitration procedure administered by the Istanbul Arbitration Centre and generally conducted by a sole arbitrator.

What is the current monetary threshold?

As of 6 August 2026, ISTAC’s official website states that the Fast-Track Arbitration Rules apply to claims not exceeding TRY 5,000,000. The current threshold should be verified before filing.

Can the parties use fast-track arbitration above TRY 5 million?

The parties may agree to use the expedited procedure for a higher-value dispute, subject to the applicable ISTAC Rules and institutional determination.

How many arbitrators decide the case?

Fast-track proceedings are ordinarily determined by a sole arbitrator.

How quickly must the respondent file its defence?

ISTAC’s guideline provides a 15-day period after notification of the statement of claim.

Can the respondent object to fast-track proceedings?

Yes. The published Rules contain a five-day period for an objection concerning application of the Fast-Track Arbitration Rules before selection or appointment of the sole arbitrator.

Who appoints the sole arbitrator?

The parties may agree on the arbitrator. If they do not agree within the applicable period, the ISTAC Board makes the appointment.

Must an oral hearing be held?

No. The sole arbitrator may decide on the documents after consulting the parties unless a hearing is considered necessary.

Can the hearing be conducted online?

Yes. ISTAC’s Online Hearing Rules permit video-conference and teleconference hearings.

When must the award be rendered?

The ordinary fast-track deadline is three months from transmission of the file to the sole arbitrator.

Can the period be extended?

Yes. It may be extended by party agreement or by the ISTAC Board where considered necessary under the applicable Rules.

Is the award binding?

Yes. The fast-track process results in a final and binding arbitral award.

Can the award be appealed on the merits?

There is no ordinary merits appeal. A limited setting-aside action may be available under the arbitration law of the seat.

Does a setting-aside action suspend enforcement?

For international arbitration governed by Law No. 4686, the action suspends enforcement. For domestic arbitration under Article 439 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the action does not automatically suspend enforcement, although a stay may be granted against security.

Can the award be enforced abroad?

A qualifying award may be recognised and enforced under the New York Convention in contracting jurisdictions, subject to local procedure and limited refusal grounds.

Conclusion

Fast-track arbitration under ISTAC Rules provides a structured method for obtaining a final decision within a significantly shortened period.

As of 6 August 2026, ISTAC states that the expedited regime applies to disputes involving claims not exceeding TRY 5,000,000. The case is ordinarily determined by one arbitrator, and the award should be rendered within three months after transmission of the file.

The procedure achieves speed by requiring early and complete submissions.

The claimant must file its full case and supporting evidence at the beginning. The respondent ordinarily has 15 days to submit its defence and evidence. The sole arbitrator then establishes a procedural timetable rapidly and decides whether additional submissions or a hearing are necessary.

A hearing is not mandatory.

Where the dispute can be determined from contracts, invoices, notices, delivery records and payment documents, a document-only procedure may save substantial time and cost.

The procedure is particularly appropriate for lower-value commercial disputes in which the facts are relatively focused and the parties need an enforceable determination quickly.

Its benefits include a sole arbitrator, predictable institutional costs, limited procedural stages, remote-hearing options and the possibility of international enforcement.

However, fast-track arbitration is not suitable for every case.

Disputes involving extensive expert analysis, multiple parties, broad document production or serious fraud allegations may require the ordinary arbitration procedure. The parties should evaluate the actual complexity of the dispute rather than considering only its monetary value.

The three-month objective must also be applied consistently with procedural fairness.

The sole arbitrator must preserve equality and provide each party with a meaningful opportunity to present its case. An award obtained quickly but rendered through a serious denial of due process may face annulment or enforcement challenges.

Contract drafting remains critical.

The arbitration clause should identify ISTAC, the seat, language, number of arbitrators and governing law. Where the parties want fast-track proceedings regardless of value—or want to exclude them entirely—they should state this expressly.

Once a dispute arises, preparation must begin immediately. A claimant should assemble its complete evidentiary case before filing, while a respondent must act as soon as the statement of claim is received.

When used for the right type of dispute, ISTAC fast-track arbitration combines procedural speed with a final, binding and potentially internationally enforceable outcome.

Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The application of ISTAC Fast-Track Arbitration Rules depends on the arbitration agreement, current ISTAC rules and monetary threshold, amount in dispute, counterclaims, seat, applicable arbitration law, complexity and requested remedies. The current institutional rules and fee schedules should be verified before commencing proceedings.