Quick Answer: An oral hearing in Israeli arbitration is not automatic — it must be ordered by the tribunal or requested by a party. The Arbitration Law 5728-1968 and the rules of the Israel Centre for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA) give the arbitrator broad discretion to run proceedings on documents alone or to hold one or more hearings. Most commercial arbitrations involving disputed facts do include at least one oral hearing. This guide explains when to request one, how witness statements are prepared, what cross-examination looks like before an Israeli tribunal, and what happens after the hearing ends.

Most foreign companies that end up in Israeli arbitration have handled litigation at home before. They know the basic rhythm: written submissions, document exchange, then a hearing where witnesses give evidence and lawyers argue the case. Israeli arbitration follows a similar pattern, but the rules governing what happens at the hearing — whether one is held at all, how witnesses are called, how examination is structured — sit almost entirely within the arbitrator's discretion.

That discretion is not unlimited. The Arbitration Law 5728-1968, the ICCA Rules, the ICC Rules, and, for international proceedings, Israel's International Commercial Arbitration Law 5784-2024 (the Model Law), all set guardrails. But the specific procedure at an oral hearing is far less standardised than a court trial, and far less predictable to a foreign party who has never appeared in one. What reduces that unpredictability, almost always, is preparation that begins well before the hearing is ever scheduled.

1. Is an Oral Hearing Mandatory in Israeli Arbitration?

No. Unlike a state court proceeding, an oral hearing in Israeli arbitration is not a right that attaches automatically. Whether one is held depends on the terms of the parties' agreement and the tribunal's procedural orders.

Under Section 9 of the First Schedule to the Arbitration Law 5728-1968, the default rules for ad hoc arbitrations, an arbitrator may conduct proceedings by written submissions unless a party requests an oral hearing or the arbitrator decides one is necessary. A documents-only arbitration — both sides submit written statements and the arbitrator decides on the papers — is entirely lawful and relatively common for smaller or lower-complexity disputes.

For institutional arbitrations the position shifts:

  • ICCA Rules: a hearing will generally be held unless all parties agree to a documents-only process
  • ICC Rules: Article 25 provides that the tribunal must hold a hearing if either party so requests; a documents-only award without a hearing requires the agreement of all parties
  • International Commercial Arbitration Law 5784-2024 (Model Law): Article 24 requires the tribunal to hold a hearing if either party requests one at an appropriate stage of the proceedings

In practice, any dispute involving contested facts — disputed delivery dates, alleged defects in goods or services, misrepresentation claims, financial disputes where the numbers are in genuine disagreement — will almost certainly include a hearing once either side asks for one. The real question is whether you request the hearing at the right time and have prepared your witnesses properly.

In Practice: Under Article 24 of the International Commercial Arbitration Law 5784-2024, a party's request for a hearing must be made "at an appropriate stage." ICCA's practice is to ask both parties at the first procedural conference — usually convened within six weeks of the tribunal's constitution — whether they want a hearing. Foreign parties who miss this consultation, often because they did not appreciate its procedural significance, can lose the practical ability to insist on a hearing later. Submit your request in writing to the ICCA Secretariat (Ha-Arba'a Street 28, Tel Aviv, 6473925) as part of your initial procedural submission, not in a letter several months into the proceedings, to preserve the right beyond any doubt.

2. Pre-Hearing Preparation: Witness Statements and Expert Reports

The single most important step before any oral hearing is the exchange of written witness statements. Israeli arbitration has adopted international practice: each party submits witness statements in advance, which stand as the witnesses' evidence-in-chief. The witnesses then appear at the hearing primarily to be cross-examined by the other side.

Tribunal procedure orders — issued at the first case management conference — typically set the following timetable:

  • Simultaneous exchange of witness statements: 8–12 weeks after the close of pleadings
  • Simultaneous exchange of expert reports: 4–8 weeks after witness statements
  • Reply witness statements (if permitted): 4 weeks after initial exchange

A witness statement in Israeli arbitration is a sworn document. The witness declares that its contents are true and correct under their personal responsibility. For a foreign national giving a statement, this declaration carries the same legal weight as a sworn affidavit before a notary in most common-law systems.

Witnesses who are not fluent in the language of the arbitration must have their statements translated. The declaring witness signs the statement in their own language; a certified translation is filed alongside it. Exhibits attached to the statement — contracts, emails, invoices — must be accompanied by certified translations into the language of the arbitration if they are in a different language.

In Practice: Israeli tribunals increasingly require witness statements to comply with the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration (2020 edition). Under IBA Rule 4.5, a witness statement must contain the witness's full name and address, background and qualifications, a detailed narrative of the facts they will testify to, reference to the exhibits relied on, and a statement of truth. Getting the declaration language right for a foreign national — especially where the statement is being signed in another country — typically takes one week of back-and-forth with Israeli counsel on form alone. The substance takes longer. Budget 3–4 working weeks with Israeli counsel for a properly prepared foreign witness statement, and do not start this process after the document exchange phase is complete.

3. The Hearing Day: Format and Sequence

An oral hearing in Israeli commercial arbitration has no fixed format. Unlike court proceedings — where the judge controls a scripted sequence that all lawyers know in advance — the arbitrator shapes the procedure as the case develops. For a foreign party this can be disorienting the first time. Here is what a typical ICCA hearing actually looks like:

  • Venue: ICCA's hearing rooms at Ha-Arba'a Street 28, Tel Aviv, or a hired venue such as a law firm's conference room
  • Language: Hebrew (domestic proceedings) or English/Hebrew (international proceedings), with interpreters if agreed
  • Participants: arbitrator or tribunal panel, parties' counsel, witnesses (waiting outside until called), and an ICCA administrative clerk for institutional proceedings
  • Transcript: not produced automatically; either party can engage a stenographer at their own cost

The typical sequence of proceedings:

  1. Opening submissions: each party's counsel summarises their case (10–30 minutes, or longer for complex disputes by prior agreement with the tribunal)
  2. Claimant's witnesses: each witness is called in turn, confirms their written statement, and is cross-examined by respondent's counsel
  3. Respondent's witnesses: same procedure
  4. Expert witnesses: usually heard after all lay witnesses, by prior agreement between the parties and the tribunal
  5. Closing submissions: oral, written (post-hearing briefs), or both — the tribunal decides at the close of evidence

Tribunals in ICCA proceedings frequently ask parties to agree on time limits for cross-examination to keep proceedings on schedule. A "chess clock" approach — where each party has a fixed total number of hearing hours — is increasingly common in multi-day hearings and is more likely to be ordered when one party's witness list is considerably longer than the other's.

In Practice: ICCA hearing facilities can accommodate one to five days of hearings. For longer cases, or where the parties prefer a neutral location, a private venue is arranged by agreement — typically a conference room at one of the large Tel Aviv law firms (Meitar, Herzog, Goldfarb Gross Seligman). The ICCA Secretariat can provide interpreter referrals for Hebrew-English, Hebrew-Russian, and Hebrew-Arabic, but does not book interpretation automatically. The requesting party bears the cost, which typically runs NIS 800–1,500 per hour for a certified interpreter. For a three-day hearing with consecutive interpretation, budget NIS 15,000–25,000 for interpretation alone, before counsel time.

4. Examination-in-Chief and Cross-Examination

Because witness statements stand as evidence-in-chief, examination-in-chief at the hearing is usually brief. Counsel typically does no more than confirm the witness's name and statement, then ask a few additional questions on points that emerged after the statement was filed — a new document produced in discovery, a factual concession made by the other side. The real substance of witness evidence happens in cross-examination.

Cross-examination in Israeli arbitration follows a hybrid of civil-law and common-law practice. The cross-examining party may:

  • Put specific factual propositions directly to the witness ("You approved this invoice in September 2024, correct?")
  • Challenge the witness's credibility or the basis for their stated knowledge
  • Highlight inconsistencies between the witness statement and documentary evidence
  • Ask about events or documents not addressed in the statement, provided they are within the scope of the dispute

Leading questions are permitted in cross-examination. Israeli arbitrators — most of whom are retired judges of the Israeli District or Supreme Court, or senior advocates with decades of litigation experience — understand that cross-examination is adversarial by design. They will intervene to prevent harassing, repetitive, or irrelevant questioning, but they will not restrict a cross-examiner who is being vigorous and effective.

One feature that regularly surprises foreign parties: Israeli arbitrators question witnesses directly, and they do so without waiting for counsel to raise a point in re-examination. An arbitrator who cannot follow an accounting entry will simply stop and ask. Common-law practitioners used to a judge who stays mostly silent tend to find this jarring. Brief your witnesses before the hearing that it will happen.

In Practice: Re-examination — questions by your own counsel after cross-examination — is permitted but limited to matters that arose from cross-examination. Attempting to use re-examination to introduce new topics or rehabilitate a witness on points they conceded will draw an objection, and experienced Israeli arbitrators will cut it short. Prepare witnesses to expect cross-examination to last three to five times longer than their examination-in-chief. For a hearing involving six witnesses, each witness may take 15 minutes of examination-in-chief and 60–90 minutes of cross-examination. Plan the hearing calendar on that ratio, not on the length of the witness statements themselves — underestimating cross-examination time is the most common scheduling error in Israeli arbitration.

5. Expert Witnesses at the Hearing

Expert witnesses are handled differently from lay witnesses in Israeli arbitration, both in the pre-hearing process and at the hearing itself.

After the exchange of written expert reports, tribunals frequently order an "expert conferencing" or "hot-tubbing" session — a format in which opposing experts appear simultaneously, answer questions together, and are examined by the tribunal and then by counsel. This format, borrowed from Australian and international commercial arbitration practice and increasingly common in ICCA proceedings, allows the tribunal to probe the specific areas of expert disagreement directly. Both experts hear the same question and give their differing answers side by side, which makes it harder for either to evade or talk around the point of conflict.

If hot-tubbing is not ordered, experts are examined consecutively: each expert confirms their written report, is cross-examined by opposing counsel, and may be re-examined. Expert cross-examination in Israeli arbitration tends to be technical; opposing counsel typically focuses on the methodology, the assumptions behind the numbers, and any internal inconsistencies in the report.

Expert reports in Israeli arbitration typically address:

  • Accounting, lost profits, or damages quantification
  • Construction defect causation and remediation costs
  • Technical standards in IP, software, or engineering disputes
  • Real estate valuation for damages calculations
  • Foreign law — where a party's rights depend on the law of another jurisdiction, a legal expert report from a qualified foreign lawyer is admissible and treated as expert evidence
In Practice: Expert reports in Israeli arbitration must contain a statement of the expert's independence and any financial relationship with the instructing party. The IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence (Rule 5.2(c)) require this declaration, and Israeli arbitrators increasingly apply it even where the IBA Rules have not been formally adopted. An expert who fails to include the declaration may have their evidence given reduced weight if the other side raises a conflict challenge. Retain experts early: reputable Israeli damages and valuation experts — typically partners at Big Four accounting firms or specialised litigation support boutiques in Tel Aviv — can be booked up six to eight months in advance for major cases, and a rushed expert appointment late in proceedings weakens the quality of the report.

6. Documents and Exhibits at the Hearing

Before the hearing, the parties agree on a set of hearing bundles — physical or electronic folders containing all documents that may be referred to during evidence. The standard structure in Israeli commercial arbitration is:

  • Core Bundle: key contractual documents, the parties' main correspondence, and agreed facts
  • Witness Bundles: one bundle per witness, containing only the documents that witness will be asked about in cross-examination
  • Expert Bundle: the documents and data underlying the expert reports
  • Authorities Bundle: legal authorities cited in submissions, if the parties have prepared legal briefs

Hebrew-language documents must be accompanied by certified English translations where the hearing language is English, and vice versa. The translating party bears this cost. Disputes about translation quality arise in a significant proportion of Israeli international arbitrations; using a single agreed translator for key documents reduces those disputes.

In Practice: Electronic document management is increasingly the norm for major ICCA proceedings. For a hearing conducted in English with documents originating in multiple languages and jurisdictions, electronic bundles on a shared platform avoid last-minute translation disputes and remove the cost and logistics of couriering physical bundles from abroad. ICCA's hearing facilities have projection and screen-sharing capabilities, but confirm with the Secretariat whether a display system is available at your chosen hearing room or whether the parties need to arrange their own. Agree on the bundle format and naming convention with opposing counsel at the pre-hearing conference — discovering on day one that each side prepared incompatible PDF sets is a disruption that costs hearing time and irritates the tribunal.

7. Language and Interpretation at the Hearing

The language of the arbitration is whatever the parties agreed in their contract's arbitration clause. Most international commercial contracts with Israeli parties provide for English-language arbitration, or at minimum permit either party to request proceedings in English. Where no language is specified:

  • ICCA Rules: the tribunal determines the language, having regard to the parties' nationalities and the language of the contract
  • ICC Rules: same approach
  • International Commercial Arbitration Law 5784-2024: Article 22 allows the tribunal to determine the language of the proceedings

In practice, Israeli parties and most Israeli arbitrators are fluent in English. Significant arbitrations with a foreign party are routinely conducted in English. When proceedings are in English but a witness speaks only Hebrew, Russian, or Arabic, the parties arrange interpretation for that witness's testimony. The interpreter translates each answer consecutively — after each question and answer — which extends the time needed for cross-examination substantially.

In Practice: Neither the ICCA nor the Israeli Ministry of Justice certifies arbitration interpreters — parties appoint any professional interpreter with relevant legal experience. The Israel Translators Association maintains a directory of certified legal translators and interpreters. For a one-day hearing, adding consecutive interpretation for two or three witnesses typically extends the hearing to one and a half days. The Israeli Supreme Court's own interpreter pool (the Courts Administration interpretation service for civil proceedings) is not available for private arbitration. Verify interpreter credentials, legal vocabulary, and familiarity with commercial arbitration format before the appointment — an interpreter unfamiliar with cross-examination technique can add hours to a hearing day.

8. Remote and Hybrid Hearings

Israeli arbitration practice has normalised virtual and hybrid hearings since 2020. ICCA's procedural guidelines accommodate remote proceedings, and the International Commercial Arbitration Law 5784-2024 expressly supports virtual hearings as a valid format for all types of proceedings.

A fully remote hearing — all participants appearing by video — is standard for procedural conferences, interim measure applications, and single-witness testimony. A substantive merits hearing lasting multiple days is more commonly run as a hybrid: the arbitrator, lead counsel, and key witnesses in a shared venue in Tel Aviv, with remote participants joining via video for specific testimony or closing arguments.

For foreign parties, remote hearings change the economics of the case:

  • No international travel costs for company witnesses appearing for a single day of testimony
  • No need for Israeli entry visas for non-national witnesses
  • Less operational disruption for senior executives whose testimony is limited in scope
  • Ability to have the party's international counsel participate alongside Israeli local counsel without travel
In Practice: Agree the video platform at the first procedural conference. Zoom and Microsoft Teams are widely used in ICCA proceedings. The ICCA does not provide its own video infrastructure; parties arrange it. Key technical requirements include: stable broadband for all participants, a backup dial-in audio line, a screen-sharing solution for document reference during cross-examination, and a clear protocol for how exhibits will be put to a remote witness (typically shared screen rather than physical documents). For cross-examination of remote witnesses, most Israeli tribunals require the witness to be alone in the room with no one visible on camera, to remove coaching concerns. Some arbitrators ask the witness to show the camera around the room before testimony begins. Brief your witnesses on this requirement in advance — it is unexpected if they have never testified remotely, and an unprepared witness can appear evasive simply from the surprise of being asked to do it.

9. Post-Hearing Briefs and the Road to the Award

After the oral hearing, tribunals typically invite written post-hearing submissions — also called closing briefs or post-hearing memorials. These allow each party to:

  • Summarise the evidence given at the hearing, including key witness answers
  • Reference the transcript by page and line if one was made
  • Address specific documents put to witnesses that require further argument
  • Make final legal submissions on the applicable law and the relief sought

Timelines for post-hearing briefs in ICCA proceedings are typically four to eight weeks after the hearing, with simultaneous exchange. Reply briefs responding to the other side's submission are sometimes permitted, adding another two to four weeks. Read the tribunal's procedural order on this point before drafting — some arbitrators prohibit new evidence or new arguments in post-hearing submissions, limiting them to commentary on what came out at the hearing. Filing something the other side can object to as new material wastes a round of correspondence nobody wants.

After post-hearing briefs, the arbitrator deliberates and issues the final award. Under the Arbitration Law 5728-1968, the award must be delivered within the time agreed by the parties or, in the absence of agreement, within a reasonable time. ICCA's standard terms encourage delivery within three to four months of the last submission. The Israeli District Court has authority under Section 28 of the Arbitration Law to set a deadline if an arbitrator is unreasonably delayed, but this power is rarely used in practice — Israeli arbitrators in commercial disputes typically issue awards within the expected window.

In Practice: Transcripts are not automatic in Israeli arbitration. To get a verbatim record of the hearing, engage a stenography or recording service before the hearing starts and obtain the tribunal's approval. Israeli court reporting firms (such as those providing services to the Tel Aviv District Court) can arrange Hebrew-English stenography for commercial arbitrations; confirm pricing and availability at least six weeks before the hearing date. If no transcript is made, post-hearing briefs written from counsel's notes will be the only record of what witnesses actually said. The opposing party may characterise the same witness answer very differently. For any hearing lasting more than one day, or where the witness evidence is central to the outcome, budget for a professional transcript — it is the most cost-effective insurance available at that stage of the proceedings.

10. The Cost of an Oral Hearing in Israeli Arbitration

Hearing costs vary substantially by case complexity and the institutional framework chosen, but foreign parties should budget for the following major components:

  • Hearing room fees (ICCA): currently NIS 2,500–6,000 per day depending on room size
  • Arbitrator's daily fees: senior Israeli arbitrators charge NIS 15,000–35,000 per hearing day; a three-person panel multiplies this figure accordingly
  • Interpretation: NIS 800–1,500 per hour for a certified interpreter; NIS 6,000–12,000 for a full hearing day
  • Transcript: NIS 3,000–7,000 per hearing day for Hebrew-English stenography
  • Travel and accommodation: for foreign parties, flights and hotel costs for counsel and witnesses attending in person

For a two-party, three-day arbitration hearing with two witnesses per side, total direct costs excluding counsel fees typically run NIS 80,000–150,000. Counsel fees — Israeli and foreign — will usually be the largest single component. The arbitrator allocates costs in the final award, and in Israeli arbitration the losing party generally bears a significant share of the prevailing party's reasonable costs, though the allocation is discretionary rather than automatic.

Frequently Asked Questions

Yes. Under Article 24 of the International Commercial Arbitration Law 5784-2024 and Section 9 of the First Schedule to the Arbitration Law 5728-1968, either party can request a hearing. Make the request early — at the first procedural conference or in your initial response to the notice of arbitration. Waiting until the documentary phase is nearly finished risks a refusal on grounds of procedural efficiency, and a tribunal that has already planned a documents-only process is unlikely to reverse course unless good cause is shown.

Not in the formal sense used in Israeli court proceedings. Witnesses sign their written statements with a declaration that the contents are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, but there is no swearing-in ceremony at the hearing itself. A witness who knowingly gives false testimony in arbitration can face civil liability and potential criminal exposure under Section 237 of the Penal Law 5737-1977 (false statement not under oath, used in proceedings). Treat the duty to testify truthfully as legally equivalent to court evidence.

An arbitrator has no direct power to compel a witness to attend. However, under Section 14 of the Arbitration Law 5728-1968, either party can apply to the Israeli District Court for a witness summons compelling attendance at the arbitration hearing. The court will issue this only if the witness is within Israeli jurisdiction and their testimony is genuinely necessary. A foreign witness resident outside Israel cannot be compelled through Israeli process. If a witness fails to appear without explanation, the tribunal can draw adverse inferences against the party who called them, which can significantly affect the outcome on contested factual points.

Yes, and in English-language arbitrations no Hebrew is required at any point. In a Hebrew-language arbitration, a foreign witness testifying in English needs a party-appointed interpreter. Counsel cross-examines in Hebrew (rendered into English for the witness), and the witness answers in English (rendered into Hebrew for the record). Consecutive interpretation roughly doubles the time needed for cross-examination. Prepare witnesses to speak in short sentences and to pause after each clause, and budget the hearing calendar accordingly.

Hearing room fees at ICCA (Ha-Arba'a Street 28, Tel Aviv) currently run NIS 2,500 to NIS 6,000 per day depending on room size. Arbitrator fees for hearing days are typically NIS 15,000 to NIS 35,000 per day for a senior Israeli arbitrator. A party-appointed interpreter for a full hearing day costs NIS 6,000 to NIS 12,000. For a two-party, three-day hearing with two witnesses per side, total direct costs excluding counsel fees typically run NIS 80,000 to NIS 150,000. The arbitrator allocates these costs in the final award, and the losing party usually bears a significant share.

Related Guides