国际商事仲裁凭借灵活高效的案件处理模式与广泛的国际认可度，已成为国际争议解决的核心方式之一。但实践中，案件处理周期拉长、费用居高不下等问题日益凸显，如何集中资源攻克疑难案件、同时高效化解简单纠纷，成为国际商事仲裁发展的重要目标。

随着国际商事争议数量持续增长，全球各地仲裁机构纷纷探索快速解纷路径，简易仲裁程序在此背景下应运而生，为当事人与仲裁庭提供了多元化的高效解纷方案。对于当事人而言，该程序能以低成本、快节奏解决标的额不大、事实清晰的纠纷，尤其成为中小企业处理此类案件的优选。但关键问题在于，简易程序如何坚守自然正义底线？仲裁庭往往对此存有顾虑—— 若一方当事人主张未获得合理公平的陈述机会，可能导致裁决在执行阶段被撤销或异议，因此，如何平衡仲裁程序的公正原则与效率需求，值得深入探讨。

（一）简易程序的定义及其具体规则

简易程序是国际仲裁机构为实现“程序效率与争议规模适配” 设计的标准化快速路径。其核心逻辑是通过删除非必要环节、压缩刚性时限、管控费用上限，在坚守当事人陈述权、证据质证权等核心公平要素的前提下，为小额、简单或紧急案件提供 “低成本、快节奏” 的争议解决选项。

在简易仲裁程序的规则设计上，全球主流仲裁机构均以“提升效率、管控成本” 为核心目标，但具体规则细节呈现差异化适配。例如，ICC 采用 “快速程序条款（Expedited Procedure Provisions）”，适用门槛为争议金额低于 300 万美元，超金额案件可通过当事人书面合意适用；裁决时限为案件管理会议召开后 6 个月内，且组庭后 15 日内需召开该会议。HKIAC 称其为 “快速程序（Expedited Procedure）”，参照 2024 年规则，争议金额低于 2500 万港币即可适用，同时允许通过 “当事人合意” 或 “特殊紧急情形” 启动；裁决时限为案卷移交仲裁庭后 6 个月内，特殊情况可延长。SIAC 则区分 “简化程序（Streamlined Procedure）” 与 “快速程序（Expedited Procedure）”，以新增的简化程序为例，争议金额低于 100 万新元可直接适用，超金额案件可依当事人书面协议适用；裁决时限严格限定为仲裁庭组成后 3 个月内，且程序中强制采用独任仲裁员审理，进一步压缩组庭与决策周期。

以下为 HKIAC、ICC、SIAC 仲裁规则主文中对简易仲裁的规定摘要：

HKIAC Article 42 – Expedited Procedure

“42.1 Prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, a party may apply to HKIAC for the arbitration to be conducted in accordance with Article 42.2 where:(a) the amount in dispute representing the aggregate of any claim and counterclaim (or any set-off defence or cross-claim) does not exceed the amount set by HKIAC, as stated on HKIAC’s website on the date the Notice of Arbitration is submitted; or(b) the parties so agree; or(c) in cases of exceptional urgency.”

ICC Article 30 – Expedited Procedure Provisions

“1.By agreeing to arbitration under the Rules, the parties agree that the expedited procedure provisions set forth in this Article 30 and in Appendix VI (collectively, the "Expedited Procedure Provisions") shall take precedence over any contrary terms of the arbitration agreement.

2.The Expedited Procedure Provisions shall apply if:

(a) the amount in dispute does not exceed the limit set out in Article 1(2) of Appendix VI (which is USD 2,000,000 for arbitration agreements concluded on or after 1 March 2017 and before 1 January 2021; USD 3,000,000 for those concluded on or after 1 January 2021); or

(b) the parties have expressly agreed to apply the Expedited Procedure Provisions.

3.The Expedited Procedure Provisions shall not apply if:

(a) the arbitration agreement was concluded before 1 March 2017;

(b) the parties have opted out of the Expedited Procedure Provisions; or

(c) the ICC Court, upon the request of a party before the constitution of the arbitral tribunal or on its own motion, determines that it is inappropriate to apply the Expedited Procedure Provisions in the circumstances.”

SIAC Rule 13 – Streamlined Procedure

13.1 An arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with Schedule 2 (Streamlined Procedure) if:(a) the parties have agreed prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal to apply the Streamlined Procedure; or(b) the amount in dispute does not exceed the equivalent of S$1,000,000 before the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, unless the President, on the application of a party, determines that the Streamlined Procedure shall not apply.

（二）简易仲裁的裁决会否遭受司法质疑

• 原告主张

  
  

原告主张未收到任何仲裁通知及裁决，直至 2022 年 11 月 2 日因内地银行账户被冻结才知晓裁决结果，遂向香港原讼法院提起申请撤销涉案裁决。理由如下：

（1）仲裁文件送达无效：被告、HKIAC 及仲裁庭的送达存在问题，物理邮件寄往非有效地址，电子邮件仅发送给已离职的低级别员工，且该员工无接收仲裁文件的权限，导致原告管理层完全不知情，未能参与仲裁程序。

（2）快速程序适用不当：被告在仲裁中主张的违约金及损害赔偿金后续增至超1800 万美元，远超 2500 万港元的快速程序适用门槛，不应继续适用该程序。

The Plaintiff claims that it did not receive any arbitration notices or the arbitral award, and only became aware of the award result on November 2, 2022, when its bank account in  the Mainland was frozen. Consequently, the Plaintiff filed an application with the High Court of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Court of First Instance) to set aside the said award, on the following grounds:

(1) Invalid service of arbitration documents: There were defects in the service of documents by the Defendant, HKIAC, and the tribunal. Physical mail was sent to an ineffective address, and electronic mail was only transmitted to a former junior employee who had no authority to receive arbitration documents. As a result, the Plaintiff’s management remained completely unaware of the arbitration, depriving the Plaintiff of the opportunity to participate in the arbitration proceedings.

(2) Improper application of the Expedited Procedure: The liquidated damages and compensation for damages claimed by the Defendant in the arbitration subsequently increased to over USD 18 million, which far exceeded the HKD 25 million threshold for applying the Expedited Procedure. Thus, the said procedure should not have continued to be applied.

• 法院裁判

  
  

（1）送达符合规则：地址（采购订单中确认的地址）、邮箱（员工 Qin 的工作邮箱）、传真号（业务名片标注）均为原告公开或双方约定的联系方式，且部分文件已实际签收，符合 2018 年 HKIAC 规则第 3.1 条。

（2）快速程序适用合规：快速程序的适用以仲裁启动时的争议金额为准，后续违约金增长是自然发生的情况，不改变案件 “争议简单” 的性质；2018 年 HKIAC 规则第 42.3 条未要求申请人主动申请终止程序，HKIAC 及仲裁庭有权根据案件情况裁量是否继续适用，且仲裁庭已在该程序框架内审慎审理。

综上，驳回原告的撤销裁决申请，认定涉案快速程序（简易程序）适用合规。

(1) Compliance with service rules: The address (as confirmed in the purchase orders), email address (the work email of Employee Qin), and fax number (as indicated on the business cards) were all publicly available contact information of the Plaintiff or mutually agreed contact methods between the parties. Furthermore, some documents were actually signed for upon receipt. Such service complies with Article 3.1 of the 2018 HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules.

(2) Lawful application of the Expedited Procedure: The application of the Expedited Procedure is based on the amount in dispute at the time of initiating the arbitration. The subsequent natural increase in liquidated damages does not alter the nature of the case as a "simple dispute". Article 42.3 of the 2018 HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules does not require the claimant to take the initiative to apply for terminating the procedure. HKIAC and the tribunal have the discretionary power to decide whether to continue applying the procedure based on the circumstances of the case, and the tribunal has conducted the trial prudently within the framework of this procedure.

In conclusion, the Plaintiff’s application to set aside the award is dismissed, and it is determined that the application of the said Expedited Procedure (summary procedure) in the case is lawful and compliant.

（三）分析与建议

无论是当事人临时约定，还是符合仲裁机构规则核准适用的简易程序，均不得偏离自然正义与程序公正的核心底线。

即便适用简易程序，仲裁庭与各方当事人仍需共同肩负维护程序正当性的责任。仲裁庭负有平等对待所有当事人的法定义务，必须为每一方提供充分、合理的机会以陈述案情与主张；同时，针对关键争议事项，仲裁庭应通过邀请当事人提交补充陈述或在必要时指令举行口头聆讯等方式，督促当事人作出进一步澄清。相应地，当事人亦应清晰、完整地阐明自身立场，并主动向仲裁庭提示各类核心要点，确保程序推进的合法性与公正性。