Supreme Court Rules on Enforcement of Class Arbitration

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC
Contact

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

The Supreme Court ruled on April 24, 2019 that an arbitration agreement which is ambiguous as to whether the parties had agreed to class arbitration was insufficient to require a party to participate in class arbitration.

In the 2011 case Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. Animal Feeds Int’l Corp., 559 U.S. 662 (2011) the Supreme Court decided that “silence” in an arbitration agreement regarding the issue of class arbitration meant that a party could not be compelled to engage in class arbitration.  In the more recent case of Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, an employee had sought to compel his employer to arbitrate on a class basis claims arising out of the release of personal data belonging to its employees.

Supreme Court: Class Arbitration Requires Clear Consent by the Parties

The Ninth Circuit had held that ambiguity regarding the issue of class arbitration would be construed against the drafter of the arbitration agreement, in that case the employer, and ordered the employer arbitrate on a class basis.  But the Supreme Court reversed, noting, as it had in Stolt-Nielsen, that class arbitration is fundamentally different than arbitration directly between the parties as it sacrifices the informality and, therefore, the efficiency inherent in individual arbitration. The Supreme Court held, therefore, that a party to an arbitration agreement may be compelled to engage in class arbitration only when the parties have clearly consented to such class arbitration.

Employers Must Understand State Laws around Arbitration Agreements

Despite this favorable ruling, employers must still be cautious when drafting arbitration agreements.  Some states have recently limited the scope of arbitration agreements between employers and employees (particularly with respect to sexual harassment claims) and, at least until such statutes are themselves challenged in court, employers should be mindful of any such state limitations when rolling out arbitration agreements.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Bass, Berry & Sims PLC | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC
Contact
more
less

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide