INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS MAY BE ENFORCEABLE BY NON-SIGNATORIES

george — Fri, 24 Jul 2020 17:37:14 +0000

On June 1, 2020 the U.S. Supreme Court held, in GE Energy Power Conversion France SAS Corp. v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC, that a non-signatory to an international arbitration agreement may rely on U.S. state-law principles such as equitable estoppel to enforce the arbitration agreement against a signatory. The Court noted that there is no distinction between domestic arbitration agreements under the Federal Arbitration Act and international arbitration agreements under the New York Convention for purposes of the analysis.

GE Energy Power Conversion France SAS Corp. v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC

The post INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS MAY BE ENFORCEABLE BY NON-SIGNATORIES first appeared on George Gluck.

U.S. Supreme Court Holds That Express Consent Required for Class Arbitration

george — Fri, 28 Jun 2019 21:01:35 +0000

On April 24, 2019, in Lamps Plus, Inc. et al. v. Frank Varela, 587 U.S. _ (2019), the U.S. Supreme Court maintained its long-standing position, expressed in its earlier decision in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp., 559 U.S. 662 at 684 (2010), that “…a party may not be compelled under the FAA to submit to class arbitration unless there is a contractual basis for concluding that the party agreed to do so.” In Stolt-Nielsen, the Court had held that “silence is not enough”; and in Lamps Plus, the Court further held that courts may not infer consent to class arbitration from an ambiguous agreement. The doctrine of contra proferentem – interpreting an ambiguous agreement against the drafter – “cannot be applied to impose class arbitration in the absence of the parties’ consent.”

Lamps Plus, Inc. et al. v. Frank Varela, 587 U.S. ___(2019)

The post U.S. Supreme Court Holds That Express Consent Required for Class Arbitration first appeared on George Gluck.