vs
Institutional Comparison
ICC, SIAC, and LCIA are
excellent institutions.
They are also incomplete.
The world's leading arbitration institutions were designed for a different era. They are excellent at producing awards. None of them is designed to prevent disputes before they arise, review awards for enforceability before they are issued, or provide institutional support after the award. UNIONE™ was built to close those gaps - not to replace them, but to go further.
ICC founded
1923
SIAC founded
1991
LCIA founded
1892
UNIONE™ - built for
this century
Side by Side
The complete institutional scorecard.
Every material dimension across which arbitration institutions can be compared - assessed honestly and specifically. Gold cells indicate the strongest position on each dimension.
| Dimension | ICC | SIAC | LCIA | UNIONE™ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before the Dispute | ||||
| Contract-stage engagementDoes the institution engage before any dispute arises? | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ Transaction Lifecycle Framework |
| Dispute Prevention CertificateFormal institutional record of dispute-ready contract | None | None | None | Only Institution |
| Dispute Risk AssessmentStructured pre-dispute risk analysis service | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ |
| Standing Neutral for long-term relationshipsPermanent appointed neutral for JVs, infrastructure, supply chains | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ |
| The Arbitration Proceedings | ||||
| Award timeline - standard trackTypical duration from commencement to final award | 12–20 months | 12–18 months | 14–24 months | 6 months (bound) |
| Expedited / SME trackDedicated fast-track for lower-value disputes | Expedited (below $3M) | Expedited (below $6M) | Limited | ✓ SME Protocol · 60-day award · Capped fees |
| Cost certainty commitmentWritten pledge not to materially exceed initial estimate | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ 20% cap · Written pledge |
| AI evidence protocol in RulesCodified rules for AI-generated evidence and AI tool use | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ Rules v3.0, Article 28 |
| Virtual hearings - native supportLegally equivalent virtual hearings, native to the institution | Supported (COVID-era) | Supported | Supported | ✓ Virtual-native · Hearing Intelligence AI |
| Tribunal Secretary rulesExplicit rules governing use, approval, and limits of tribunal secretaries | Guidance note only | Limited | Limited | ✓ Rules v3.0, Article 18 - full codification |
| Early determination procedureFormal mechanism to dispose of manifestly unmeritorious claims | Article 22(i) 2021 Rules | Rule 29A, 2025 Rules | ✗ | ✓ Article 29 - 4 grounds, 30-day decision |
| Third-party funding disclosure rulesCodified obligation to disclose funders at commencement | Partial | ✓ | Partial | ✓ Article 13 - identity, nature, terms disclosure |
| Relationship Preservation WindowFormal built-in settlement window before award is rendered | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ Article 45 - 14-day window, without prejudice |
| After the Award - Enforcement | ||||
| Pre-finalisation award reviewInternal institutional review of draft award before it is issued | Scrutiny (form only) | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ ERR - enforceability + procedural + form |
| Enforceability CertificateFormal rated certificate of enforceability issued with every award | None | None | None | Only Institution |
| Post-award compliance monitoringInstitutional documentation of award satisfaction / non-compliance | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ 90-day monitoring · Compliance Certificate |
| Enforcement cooperation clause in RulesParty obligation to facilitate enforcement; bad-faith resistance = costs | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ Article 38 - costs liability for bad faith |
| Post-award enforcement support serviceLocal counsel identification, certified copies, apostille, jurisdiction strategy | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ Article 51 |
| Technology & AI | ||||
| AI clause generatorAI tool to generate arbitration clauses for specific transaction types | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ |
| Document Review IntelligenceAI-assisted review of arbitration documents for gaps, risks, inconsistencies | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ |
| Hearing Intelligence - live transcription + AI flagsReal-time AI monitoring, transcription and issue flagging during hearings | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ |
| Enforceability Predictor toolJurisdiction-by-jurisdiction enforceability assessment pre-filing | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ 170+ jurisdictions |
| Institutional Transparency | ||||
| Annual performance data publicationCase stats, duration, enforcement rates published annually | Statistics report | Annual report | Limited | ✓ Full performance report incl. ERR distribution |
| Arbitrator performance metricsPublished anonymised performance data for panel members | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ Anonymised · Article 62 |
The Specific Gaps
Eight things ICC, SIAC, and LCIA
do not currently provide.
These are not aspirational features. They are specific, codified services with named articles in UNIONE™ Rules v3.0, available in every case from day one.
01
Enforcement Readiness Review
Before any UNIONE™ award is finalised, UNIONE™'s Award Review Committee reviews it - not on the merits, but for procedural integrity, legal robustness, and enforceability risk across identified enforcement jurisdictions. ICC conducts a scrutiny of awards, but it is limited to form. No institution reviews awards for enforcement risk before they are issued. UNIONE™ does.
ICCForm scrutiny only. No enforcement risk assessment.✗
SIACNo pre-finalisation review of any kind.✗
LCIANo pre-finalisation review of any kind.✗
UNIONE™Mandatory ERR - enforceability, procedure, form. 21-day review window. Every award.✓
02
Enforceability Certificate
After the ERR, every UNIONE™ award is accompanied by a formal Enforceability Certificate rated High, Standard, or Jurisdiction-Specific Considerations - with specific enforcement jurisdictions assessed and noted. This certificate is admissible in enforcement proceedings as institutional evidence of procedural integrity. No other institution has ever issued anything equivalent.
ICCNo certificate of any kind.✗
SIACNo certificate of any kind.✗
LCIANo certificate of any kind.✗
UNIONE™Enforceability Certificate - 3-tier rating. Issued with every award. Usable in enforcement proceedings.✓
03
Contract-Stage Engagement
ICC, SIAC, and LCIA have no institutional service for parties at the contract stage. Their involvement begins when a Notice of Arbitration is filed. UNIONE™'s Transaction Lifecycle Framework begins before any dispute exists - with clause design, dispute risk assessment, DPC registration, and standing neutral appointment.
ICCEngagement begins at Notice of Arbitration.✗
SIACEngagement begins at Notice of Arbitration.✗
LCIAEngagement begins at Notice of Arbitration.✗
UNIONE™Engagement at contract stage. DPC registration. Dispute Risk Assessment. Standing Neutral.✓
04
Cost-Certainty Pledge
ICC, SIAC, and LCIA provide fee schedules. None of them commits in writing not to materially exceed an initial cost estimate. UNIONE™ does. At registration, UNIONE™ provides a written Cost-Certainty Estimate and commits not to exceed it by more than 20% without prior notice and acknowledgement.
ICCFee schedule published. No cap commitment.✗
SIACFee schedule published. No cap commitment.✗
LCIAHourly-rate model. Highly unpredictable.✗
UNIONE™Written Cost-Certainty Estimate + 20% cap pledge. Rules v3.0, Article 52.✓
05
AI Evidence Protocol
AI-generated evidence is already appearing in international arbitration proceedings. None of the major institutions has codified specific rules for its authentication, disclosure, or weight. UNIONE™ Rules v3.0 Article 28 codifies the first AI evidence framework in any institution's arbitration rules.
ICCGeneral evidence principles. No AI-specific rules.✗
SIACGeneral evidence principles. No AI-specific rules.✗
LCIAGeneral evidence principles. No AI-specific rules.✗
UNIONE™First codified AI evidence framework in arbitration rules. Article 28.✓
06
Post-Award Compliance Monitoring
All three legacy institutions close their files when the award is delivered. UNIONE™ offers Post-Award Compliance Monitoring - a 90-day service that maintains a formal institutional record of award compliance, issues a Compliance Certificate on satisfaction, and issues a Non-Compliance Record on failure.
ICCFile closed on award delivery.✗
SIACFile closed on award delivery.✗
LCIAFile closed on award delivery.✗
UNIONE™90-day monitoring. Compliance Certificate or Non-Compliance Record. Article 50.✓
07
Enforcement Cooperation Clause
None of the major institutions embed an enforcement cooperation obligation directly into their Rules - making parties contractually liable for bad-faith resistance to enforcement. UNIONE™ Rules v3.0 Article 38 requires every party to take all reasonable steps to facilitate enforcement, and makes bad-faith resistance to enforcement a costs liability.
ICCNo enforcement cooperation obligation.✗
SIACNo enforcement cooperation obligation.✗
LCIANo enforcement cooperation obligation.✗
UNIONE™Binding obligation. Bad-faith resistance = costs liability. Article 38.✓
08
Institutional Performance Transparency
ICC, SIAC, and LCIA publish statistics reports. None publishes arbitrator performance metrics, award delivery compliance rates, or ERR distribution data. UNIONE™ publishes all of these. Trust in an institution should be built on data, not on age.
ICCCaseload statistics. No arbitrator performance data.-
SIACAnnual report. No arbitrator performance data.-
LCIALimited transparency. No arbitrator performance data.-
UNIONE™Full institutional report: performance, durations, ERR distribution, arbitrator metrics. Article 62.✓
Cost & Time
The commercial reality of
legacy arbitration.
Cost and duration are not secondary considerations. They are the primary reason mid-market parties avoid international arbitration entirely - and choose worse alternatives.
✦ The UNIONE™ Cost-Certainty Pledge
At registration, UNIONE™ issues a written Cost-Certainty Estimate covering all institutional fees. UNIONE™ commits not to exceed this estimate by more than 20% without prior written notice and acknowledgement from the parties. No other institution makes this commitment.
The SME Access Protocol
For disputes under USD 750,000: capped institutional fees, no legal representation required, documents-only default, 60-day award timeline, and a dedicated case manager. The mid-market - the largest underserved segment in international arbitration - has a system designed for it.
Why LCIA costs are highest
LCIA bills arbitrators on an hourly-rate model. A three-arbitrator panel on a complex dispute at £450–£600/hour each, over 18–24 months, produces costs that are structurally impossible to predict or cap. UNIONE™ does not permit open-ended time-based billing for institutional fee components.
The Gap That Matters Most
An award that cannot be enforced
is not a resolution. It is a document.
The enforcement gap is the most consequential unsolved problem in international arbitration. ICC, SIAC, and LCIA produce excellent awards. None of them takes institutional responsibility for what happens after.
🏁
ICC / SIAC / LCIA: The process ends here
Award is issued. File is closed. The winning party is on their own - navigating enforcement in jurisdictions they may not know, with an award whose enforceability profile the institution has not assessed.
🔍
UNIONE™: Enforcement Readiness Review
Before the award is issued, UNIONE™'s Award Review Committee reviews it - examining procedural integrity, legal robustness, and enforceability risk in the identified enforcement jurisdictions.
✦
UNIONE™: Enforceability Certificate issued
Every award is accompanied by an institutional Enforceability Certificate - rated High, Standard, or Jurisdiction-Specific. Admissible in enforcement proceedings as evidence of procedural integrity.
📋
UNIONE™: Post-Award Compliance Monitoring
90-day institutional monitoring. If the award is satisfied - Compliance Certificate. If it is not - a Non-Compliance Record, admissible in enforcement proceedings.
UNIONE™ Enforceability Certificate
Issued with every UNIONE™ award following the ERR
No other institution provides this.
ICC, SIAC, and LCIA do not issue enforceability certificates. They do not conduct post-award compliance monitoring. They do not provide enforcement support services. UNIONE™ is the only institution that treats enforcement as an institutional responsibility, not a party's problem.
Decision Guide
Who should choose which institution.
A direct and honest assessment. ICC, SIAC, and LCIA are excellent institutions. The choice depends on what you specifically need.
Choose if you need
ICC
- The most globally recognised institutional name - where the counterparty's country will respond to that name specifically
- French law as governing law and Paris as the natural seat
- Very large, complex, multi-jurisdictional disputes with significant political sensitivity
- The ICC scrutiny process for your award (though limited to form, not enforcement)
Choose if you need
SIAC
- Asia-Pacific disputes where Singapore is the natural seat and counterparty familiarity with SIAC is strong
- The 2025 SIAC Rules and Singapore's established arbitration-friendly judiciary
- A well-tested expedited procedure for disputes under USD 6 million
- Strong panel across construction, shipping, energy, and technology sectors in Asia
Choose if you need
UNIONE™
- An award that comes with an Enforceability Certificate - particularly where enforcement jurisdiction is uncertain or contested
- A mid-market or SME dispute under USD 750,000 that the major institutions do not serve well
- A long-term relationship where prevention matters - JV, infrastructure, supply chain
- Cost certainty from day one - with a written pledge not to exceed the initial estimate by more than 20%
- The most current rules - AI evidence protocol, enforcement cooperation clause, performance transparency
ICC and SIAC and LCIA
built the foundations.
UNIONE™ built what comes next.
built the foundations.
UNIONE™ built what comes next.
The question is not which institution has the longest history. The question is which institution is designed for the way global commerce works today - and will work tomorrow. UNIONE™ is the only institution that begins at the contract, continues through proceedings, and does not stop at the award.
8
Structural gaps addressed that no other institution currently fills - all codified in UNIONE™ Rules v3.0
✦
Only institution with an Enforceability Certificate on every award - issued after a mandatory pre-finalisation review
170+
Jurisdictions assessed in the ERR and Enforceability Predictor tool before any case is filed
0
Legacy institutions with a cost-certainty pledge - UNIONE™ is the only institution that commits not to exceed its initial estimate by more than 20%
Next Step
Ready to use the most complete arbitration system available?
Embed the UNIONE™ clause in your next contract. ADOPT UNIONE. Or start a conversation with our team - we respond within 24 hours.