IsraelLawCan new claims be added to an Israeli arbitration after proceedings have commenced?
Once an Israeli arbitration has commenced — typically from the date of the notice of arbitration or the first substantive procedural exchange — the scope of the dispute is defined by the parties' statements of claim and defense. The Arbitration Law 5728-1968 grants the arbitral tribunal broad procedural authority under Sections 5 and 6, including the power to determine how the proceedings are conducted. An amendment to add new claims is treated as a procedural application: the applicant submits a written request explaining the new claim, its factual basis, and why it could not have been included in the original statement. The opposing party has the right to object and the arbitrator hears both sides before deciding. Israeli arbitral practice treats late amendments skeptically when they would require new discovery, additional expert evidence, or the reopening of witness statements already exchanged. The full guide on the Israeli arbitration process covers the tribunal's procedural powers.
Adding a counterclaim is generally treated more permissively than introducing an entirely separate claim — a counterclaim arising from the same contract or factual matrix is usually seen as naturally within the arbitrator's mandate even if raised after the initial exchange. An entirely new transaction or legal theory raises a more fundamental question: whether it falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement at all. An arbitrator who accepts a claim outside the arbitration agreement risks having that part of the award set aside under Section 24 of the Arbitration Law for exceeding authority (*chrichat smachut*). Under the 2024 Israeli Arbitration Law (*Hok HaBorrerut HaBeinle'umi*) which applies to international arbitrations, the framework for amendments broadly follows the UNCITRAL Model Law approach, giving tribunals structured discretion. The safest course for any party anticipating related disputes is to plead all potential claims as alternatives in the initial statement of claim, rather than seeking to add them later.
- Governing law: Sections 5–6 (procedural authority), Arbitration Law 5728-1968; 2024 ICA Law for international arbitrations
- Decision-maker: the arbitral tribunal — a court cannot override the arbitrator's procedural ruling on scope during the proceedings
- Key factors: timing of the request, prejudice to the other party, scope of the arbitration agreement, disruption to the hearing timetable
- Risk of over-accepting: the portion of the award based on an out-of-scope claim may be set aside under Section 24 of the Arbitration Law 5728-1968
- Institutional rules: ICCA and ICC rules both provide a formal amendment procedure requiring a written request and opposing party opportunity to respond
From the full guide: The Israeli Arbitration Process: From Clause to Award — A Step-by-Step Guide
Related Questions
Get a Free Consultation with Adv. Eli ShimonyPrepared under the direction of Adv. Eli Shimony, Eli Shimony Law Office · Editorial policy