Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Jurisdiction

PDF

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Journal

2012

Arbitration contracts

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

Judicial Policing Of Consumer Arbitration , Edward A. Dauer Apr 2012

Judicial Policing Of Consumer Arbitration , Edward A. Dauer

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Adhesive consumer arbitration agreements pose questions that go beyond the problems of adhesion contracting generally. This essay describes why standard-form consumer arbitration requirements may be particularly troublesome. Despite its superficial neutrality, arbitration between individual consumers and business entities may be systematically more favorable to the business entities. The rules of arbitration law, however, inhibit effective judicial policing of the consequences of those inequalities. The federal sources of arbitration law further diminish the ability of state-based contract law to police the more subtle abuses. The result is a particularly difficult jurisprudential problem with a specially weakened legal solution. This essay offers, …


First Options Of Chicago, Inc. V. Kaplan And The Kompetenz-Kompetenz Principle , Adrianna Dulic Apr 2012

First Options Of Chicago, Inc. V. Kaplan And The Kompetenz-Kompetenz Principle , Adrianna Dulic

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

In 1995, the United States Supreme Court in First Options of Chicago, Incorporated v. Kaplan considered whether arbitral tribunals or courts should have the primary power to decide if parties agreed to arbitrate the merits of the dispute and whether the court of appeals should accept the district court's findings of fact and law or apply a de novo standard of review. The Court unanimously held that, unless the parties clearly and unmistakably provide otherwise, the question of whether the parties agreed to arbitrate is to be decided by the court, not the arbitral tribunal. Furthermore, in such a case, …


Reframing The Dilemma Of Contractually Expanded Judicial Review: Arbitral Appeal Vs. Vacatur , Eric Van Ginkel Apr 2012

Reframing The Dilemma Of Contractually Expanded Judicial Review: Arbitral Appeal Vs. Vacatur , Eric Van Ginkel

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

The Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") of 1925 was created to ensure enforceability of agreements to arbitrate. The FAA is the centerpiece of the federal arbitration policy as construed by the Supreme Court. Section 10(a) FAA enumerates grounds on which an arbitral award can be set aside. The central issue discussed herein is whether parties can agree by contract to allow one of the parties to initiate review of the arbitral award by a court that would otherwise have jurisdiction over those parties, or whether the court's powers are somehow limited to the grounds for vacatur enumerated in Section 10(a) FAA. …


Will Eeoc V. Waffle House, Inc. Signal The Beginning Of The End For Mandatory Arbitration Agreements In The Employment Context? , Marc A. Altenbernt Apr 2012

Will Eeoc V. Waffle House, Inc. Signal The Beginning Of The End For Mandatory Arbitration Agreements In The Employment Context? , Marc A. Altenbernt

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Since the inception of several employment and discrimination statutes, arbitration has grown exponentially as an alternative for the adjudication of employment disputes. The Supreme Court has traditionally held that statutory claims are indeed arbitrable pursuant to a valid arbitration agreement under the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"). In an effort to end employment discrimination based on "race, color, religion, sex, or national origin," Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"). In order to adequately effect this calling, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") was created as the Act's primary enforcement mechanism. While arbitration agreements under the FAA and …


Compulsory Pre-Dispute Arbitration Clauses In The Employment Context After Eeoc V. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps , Maria Wusinich Mar 2012

Compulsory Pre-Dispute Arbitration Clauses In The Employment Context After Eeoc V. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps , Maria Wusinich

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

In EEOC v. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps, decided in 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals aligned its view with its sister circuits and with the Supreme Court regarding the enforceability of arbitration agreements in employment discrimination cases. The court held that an employee's agreement to arbitrate a claim arising under federal anti-discrimination law is enforceable. At first glance, it would appear that as far as the judicial branch is concerned, the longstanding issue of the validity of mandatory arbitration agreements in the employment context is now settled. This article, in contrast, posits that the courts will be …


Looking Into A Crystal Ball: Courts' Inevitable Refusal To Enforce Parties' Contracts To Expand Judicial Review Of Non-Domestic Arbitral Awards, Eric Chafetz Mar 2012

Looking Into A Crystal Ball: Courts' Inevitable Refusal To Enforce Parties' Contracts To Expand Judicial Review Of Non-Domestic Arbitral Awards, Eric Chafetz

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article will first discuss the legislative history of the NY Convention in general and the history of its vacatur provisions in particular. Second, it will summarize certain federal court decisions that address the Expansion Issues and reach the Consensus. Third, it will argue that the Expansion Issues were resolved incorrectly, because the courts addressing them do not recognize how the operative/material language in section 207 of Ch. 2 of the FAA and section 9 of Ch. 129 of the FAA has a virtually identical meaning, and therefore should have been construed and applied in the same manner. Fourth, this …