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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

Mandatory Predispute Consumer Arbitration, Structural Bias, And Incentivizing Procedural Safeguards, Nancy A. Welsh Oct 2012

Mandatory Predispute Consumer Arbitration, Structural Bias, And Incentivizing Procedural Safeguards, Nancy A. Welsh

Faculty Scholarship

Within the past several decades, there has been an explosion in the creation, institutionalization and use of “alternative” dispute resolution procedures. Mandatory predispute arbitration has generated the most controversy because it appears beset with structural bias. The recent cases of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion and Compucredit Corp. v. Greenwood have raised additional concerns as the Supreme Court has announced that corporations can force consumers to arbitrate their private and statutory claims and give up their rights to pursue class relief. This Article begins by arguing that the Supreme Court’s enthusiastic embrace of mandatory predispute arbitration should be understood primarily …


Becoming "Investor-State Mediation", Nancy A. Welsh, Andrea Kupfer Schneider Apr 2012

Becoming "Investor-State Mediation", Nancy A. Welsh, Andrea Kupfer Schneider

Faculty Scholarship

While the current system of investment treaty arbitration has definitely improved upon the “gunboat diplomacy” used at times to address disputes between states and foreign investors, there are signs that reform is needed. Increasingly, states and investors express concerns regarding the costs associated with the arbitration process; some states are refusing to comply with arbitral awards; other states now hesitate to sign new bilateral investment treaties; and citizens have begun to engage in popular unrest at the prospect of investment treaty arbitration. As a result, both investors and states are advocating for the use of mediation to supplement investor-state arbitration. …


Navigating Eu Law And The Law Of International Arbitration, George A. Bermann Jan 2012

Navigating Eu Law And The Law Of International Arbitration, George A. Bermann

Faculty Scholarship

The European Union and international arbitration are two robust legal regimes that have managed to develop largely in accordance with their own respective “first principles,” and they have accordingly thrived. This article initially explains why that has been the case.

But the era of parallelism between the regimes has ended, and rather suddenly. This article identifies the two principal fronts on which tensions between EU law and international arbitration law have emerged. Interestingly, both commercial and investment arbitration are implicated.

A first front entails a conflict between the European Court of Justice's (ECJ's) expansive notions of EU public policy and …


The Politics Of Class Action Arbitration: Jurisdictional Legitimacy And Vindication Of Contract Rights, William W. Park Jan 2012

The Politics Of Class Action Arbitration: Jurisdictional Legitimacy And Vindication Of Contract Rights, William W. Park

Faculty Scholarship

Exactly one year apart, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two cases on “class arbitration” proceedings, one about international shipping and the other on consumer purchases of mobile telephones. Each decision inflicted damage on a claimant’s right to invoke collective action in arbitrations. Read together, the opinions serve as a prism through which to refract key elements in an increasingly politicized debate on the legal framework for arbitration, particularly within the United States.


Private Regulation Of Consumer Arbitration, Christopher R. Drahozal, Samantha Zyontz Jan 2012

Private Regulation Of Consumer Arbitration, Christopher R. Drahozal, Samantha Zyontz

Faculty Scholarship

Arbitration providers, such as the American Arbitration Association ("AAA') and JAMS, have promulgated due process protocols to regulate the fairness of consumer and employment arbitration agreements. A common criticism of these due process protocols, however, has been that they lack an enforcement mechanism. While arbitration providers state that they enforce the protocols by refusing to administer cases in which the arbitration agreement materially fails to comply with the relevant protocol, the private nature of arbitral dispute resolution makes it difficult to verify whether providers in fact refuse to administer such cases.

This Article reports the results of the first empirical …