Published: 2026-03-02 00:00
Article 32 of the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the International Commercial Dispute Prevention and Settlement Organization (ICDPASO) (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”) establishes a procedural framework for “suspension and resumption,” systematizing the sequence of “application requirements, decision mechanism, and procedural resumption.” This provides an institutional foundation for the arbitral tribunal to manage the suspension of arbitration proceedings.
I. Text of Article 32 of the Rules
Article 32. Suspension and Resumption of the Arbitration Proceedings
1. If, during the arbitral proceedings, the parties jointly apply for a suspension or the arbitral proceedings need to be suspended due to special circumstances, the Arbitral Tribunal may decide the suspension thereof.
If the Arbitral Tribunal has not been formed, it shall be decided by the Court of Arbitration.
2. After the reason for suspending the arbitral proceedings disappears or the suspension period expires, the arbitral proceedings shall resume
II. Clause-by-Clause Commentary on Article 32
Paragraph (1) Grounds for Initiating a Suspension of Proceedings and Authority Allocation
1. Textual Analysis
First, the grounds for initiation: “a joint application by all parties” or “the occurrence of special circumstances necessitating a suspension of proceedings.” “Joint application” reflects the parties' right to dispose of their claims by mutual agreement. “Special circumstances” reserves necessary procedural management discretion for the arbitral tribunal, applicable to unforeseeable objective obstacles such as: the death of a party requiring the participation of successors; the incapacity of a party where a legal representative remains undetermined; the case's dependence on the outcome of another pending proceeding; suspected criminal offenses within the case; key evidence being preserved or investigated by judicial authorities, temporarily preventing cross-examination; or force majeure preventing procedural advancement.
Second, the decision-making authority adopts a “dual configuration” for practical efficiency. Where the arbitral tribunal has already been constituted, it shall decide whether to suspend proceedings. Where the tribunal has not yet been constituted, the arbitration institution shall handle the matter preliminarily. This design aligns with the management logic of institutional arbitration, preventing procedural vacuums or delays due to the absence of a tribunal, while also facilitating the coordination of fee payments, tribunal formation schedules, and procedural transitions.
Finally, the discretionary nature of the decision: “may decide” indicates that suspension is not an obligation but falls within the tribunal's discretion. Even if jointly requested by the parties, the tribunal may still assess risks of procedural abuse (e.g., respondents delaying proceedings under the guise of settlement) and impose suspension conditions as appropriate, such as time limits, fee arrangements, or maintenance of interim measures.
2. Comparative Law Perspective
While some leading international arbitration institutions do not dedicate specific provisions to procedural suspension, they generally recognize “suspension” as a procedural management tool. Cost payment mechanisms are a common trigger. For instance: UNCITRAL Rules (2021) permit the tribunal to suspend or terminate proceedings if parties fail to pay fees in full①; ICC Rules (2021) explicitly state that if an advance payment request is not complied with, the Secretary General may, after consultation, instruct the tribunal to suspend work, with failure to make timely payment deemed a withdrawal of the claim②; The Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) Rules (2024) further strengthen the authority of the institution to suspend or terminate administration due to outstanding fees before the tribunal is constituted③. Some rules also provide for suspension based on procedural coordination. For example, the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) Rules (2025) emphasize that where the same tribunal is hearing multiple arbitrations involving common issues of law or fact, a party may apply for suspension of proceedings④. Furthermore, similar to the general provision on suspension in Article 32 of these Rules, Article 43 of the SIAC Rules (2025) (“Suspension, Settlement, and Termination of Arbitration Proceedings”) stipulates that the Registrar or the arbitral tribunal may suspend proceedings pursuant to the parties' agreement or other provisions of the Rules. After hearing the parties' views, the Registrar or tribunal may also order the suspension of any time limit⑤.
Article 32 covers two initiation scenarios: “joint application” and “special circumstances,” while explicitly addressing the practical management reality that “the Court shall decide where the arbitral tribunal has not been constituted.”
3. Practical Guidance
Joint applications should clearly specify the “purpose of suspension + anticipated duration + conditions for resumption.” For example: “To facilitate a 60-day mediation process,” “To resume proceedings upon authorization by the insolvency administrator,” or “To resume upon issuance of a critical expert opinion.”
It is recommended to concurrently agree on procedural arrangements during the suspension period. This includes whether to continue advancing preservation measures, whether procedural deadlines are suspended, and how costs are handled.
Prevent tactical suspensions. Where genuine settlement intent exists, a “short-term suspension + automatic resumption upon expiration” agreement structure may be adopted, naturally connecting with the resumption procedures under Paragraph (2) of these Rules.
Paragraph (2) Trigger Conditions for Resumption and Procedural Continuation
1. Textual Analysis
This section stipulates two trigger conditions for resuming proceedings.
First, the disappearance of the cause for suspension, such as: Failure or termination of settlement, mediation, or negotiation facilitation; Determination of a successor to rights and obligations following the dissolution of a legal person or other organization as a party; Assumption of control over the debtor's assets by a bankruptcy administrator; Bankruptcy settlement in a bankruptcy case involving the respondent already accepted by the People's Court; Determination of an heir to inherit rights or assume obligations following the death of a citizen as a party; Conclusion of the evidence preservation or investigation phase, enabling the scheduling of evidence examination. Second, the expiration of the agreed suspension period triggers the resumption of proceedings.
This design embodies a pragmatic institutional logic. It transforms “suspension” from an indeterminate state into a controllable condition driven by time or events, thereby preventing proceedings from being indefinitely stalled due to suspension and safeguarding the finality and predictability of arbitration.
2. Practical Guidance
During suspension, parties are advised to retain all evidence demonstrating the cessation of suspension grounds (e.g., correspondence, mediation termination statements, court documents regarding bankruptcy proceedings) to expedite reinstatement and minimize disputes.
If extension is necessary, parties should apply before the original suspension period expires, clearly stating the requested extension duration and its necessity. This prevents procedural reinstatement from catching parties unprepared due to insufficient advance notice.
①UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (2021) art 43.4, which provides that: “If the required deposits are not paid in full within 30 days after the receipt of the request, the arbitral tribunal shall so inform the parties in order that one or more of them may make the required payment. If such payment is not made, the arbitral tribunal may order the suspension or termination of the arbitral proceedings.”
②ICC 2021 Arbitration Rules art. 37.6), which provided that: “When a request for an advance on costs has not been complied with, and after consultation with the arbitral tribunal, the Secretary General may direct the arbitral tribunal to suspend its work and set a time limit, which must be not less than 15 days, on the expiry of which the relevant claims shall be considered as withdrawn. Should the party in question wish to object to this measure, it must make a request within the aforementioned period for the matter to be decided by the Court. Such party shall not be prevented, on the ground of such withdrawal, from reintroducing the same claims at a later date in another proceeding.”
③HKIAC 2024 Administered Arbitration Rules art 41.4 , which provided that: “If the required deposits are not paid in full to HKIAC within 30 days after receipt of the request, HKIAC shall so inform the parties in order that one or another of them may make the required payment. If such payment is not made:
(a) where the arbitral tribunal is not yet constituted, HKIAC may suspend or cease to administer the arbitration;
(b) the arbitral tribunal may order the suspension or termination of the arbitration or continue with the arbitration on such basis and in respect of such claim or counterclaim as the arbitral tribunal considers fit.
④SIAC Rules（2025）art.17.1, which provides that: “17.1 Where the same Tribunal is constituted in two or more arbitrations, and a common question of law or fact arises out of or in connection with all the arbitrations, a party to the arbitrations may apply to the Tribunal for the arbitrations to be coordinated such that:
.......
(c) any of the arbitrations shall be suspended pending a determination in any of the other arbitrations.”
⑤SIAC Rules（2025）art.43.1, which provides that: “The Registrar or the Tribunal, as appropriate, may suspend an arbitration in accordance with such terms as the parties have agreed or as otherwise provided in these Rules. The Registrar or the Tribunal may, after considering the views of the parties, order the tolling of any timelines.”
