In American Express, Supreme Court Confirms the Enforceability of Class Action Arbitration Waivers

by Holland & Knight LLP

In a decision that significantly strengthens the ability of parties and employers to ensure that they will not be forced to arbitrate on a class basis, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a waiver of the right to arbitrate on a class basis in an arbitration agreement is enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) even with respect to federal statutory claims — and a party cannot avoid such a class arbitration waiver by asserting that individual arbitration is too expensive or the party cannot vindicate its statutory rights in individual arbitration. American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, No. 12–133 (June 20, 2013).

This decision allows parties to avoid the concerns created by the Court's recent decision in Oxford Health Plans LLC. v. Sutter, 569 U.S. ____ (2013), by expressly stating that the arbitration agreement does not permit class arbitration.


An agreement between American Express and merchants who accept American Express cards re­quired all of their disputes to be resolved by arbitration. It further provided that there "shall be no right or authority for any Claims to be arbi­trated on a class action basis."

A group of merchants nonetheless filed a class action lawsuit in court, alleging that American Express had violated the antitrust laws and seeking treble damages on behalf of the class. American Express petitioned the court under the FAA to enforce the arbitration agreement and require each merchant to arbitrate its antitrust claims individually. The merchants countered, though, by asserting that the cost of ex­pert analysis necessary to prove the antitrust claims would greatly exceed the maximum recovery for an individual plaintiff, and that they would thus be unable to "effectively vindicate" their statutory rights under the antitrust laws in an individual arbitration. The dis­trict court agreed with American Express.

On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit sided with the merchants. It ruled that because of the prohibitive costs that the merchants would face if they had to arbitrate individually, the merchants could not effectively vindicate their statutory rights under the antitrust laws. Therefore, the class-action waiver was unenforceable, individual arbitration could not pro­ceed and the merchants were entitled to pursue their antitrust claims as a class action in court.

Justices Permit Class Action Waivers

A 5-3 majority of the Supreme Court agreed with American Express, ruling that the FAA does not permit courts to invalidate a contractual waiv­er of class arbitration on the ground that the plaintiff's cost of indi­vidually arbitrating a federal statutory claim exceeds the potential recovery. It stated that the FAA reflects the overarching principle that arbitration is a matter of contract. According to the ruling, the courts must "rigorously enforce" arbitration agree­ments according to their terms, even for claims alleging a violation of a federal statute, unless the FAA's mandate has been "'overridden by a contra­ry congressional command.'"

The Court majority found no contrary congressional command that requires rejection of the class-arbitration waiver here. The antitrust laws do not guarantee an affordable procedural path to the vindication of every claim, or "evince an in­tention to preclude a waiver" of class-action procedure, the majority stated.It further concluded that Congress's approval of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, which provides the rights to and procedures for class actions, does not establish a general entitlement to class proceedings for the vindication of statutory rights that warrants refusing to enforce a class action waiver. According to the majority, Rule 23 imposes stringent requirements for certi­fication that exclude most claims, and this Court rejects the as­sertion that the class-notice requirement must be dispensed with be­cause the "prohibitively high cost" of compliance would "frustrate[plaintiff's] attempt to vindicate the policies underlying the antitrust" laws.

The Court also stated more generally that the inability to "effectively vindicate" statutory rights in arbitration does not warrant refusing to enforce the class action waiver. The Court has ruled that it will not enforce arbitration agreements that do not allow a party to "effectively vindicate" its statutory rights, but it said that this principle comes from a desire to prevent "prospective waiver of a party’s right to pursue statutory remedies." Thus, the doctrine would make unenforceable a provision in an arbitration agreement forbidding the assertion of certain statutory rights, and it would perhaps preclude filing and administrative fees attached to arbitration that are so high as to make access to the forum impracticable. But, the court said, the fact that the terms of an arbitration agreement, such as a class action waiver, may make it not worth the expense involved in proving a statutory remedy, does not constitute the elimination of the right to pursue that remedy. According to the majority, a class-action waiver merely limits arbitration to the two contracting parties. "It no more eliminates those parties’ right to pursue their statutory remedy than did federal law before its adoption of the class action" procedure in 1938.  

According to the Court, its decisions in Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U. S. 20 (1991) and AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U. S. ___, demonstrate that class action waivers in arbitration agreements are enforceable and do not preclude the effective vindication of statutory rights. The majority noted that in Gilmer, "we had no qualms in enforcing a class waiver in an arbitration agreement even though the federal statute at issue, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, ex­pressly permitted collective actions." The Court said the collective action provision did "not mean that individual attempts at conciliation were intended to be barred." And the majority stated thatConcepcion, 563 U. S. ___ all but resolves this case. There, in finding that a law that conditioned enforcement of arbitration on the availability of class procedures violated the FAA, the Court specifically rejected the argument that class arbitration was neces­sary to prosecute claims "that might otherwise slip through the legal system."

A Big Win for Employers

The American Express decision is a big win for employers and others who believe arbitration is a more cost-effective way to resolve disputes but have been concerned about the risk of being forced to arbitrate on a class basis. Most parties are unwilling to arbitrate on a class basis because, as the Supreme Court's recent decision in Oxford Health Plans LLC. v. Sutter, 569 U.S. ____ (2013) shows, it is exceptionally difficult to overturn an arbitrator's decision. As a result, in class arbitration, a party essentially gives its fate to the arbitrator with virtually no chance of appeal from a bad decision. 

Parties that have attempted to address this problem using class action waivers have been forced with challenges that either a statute precludes class action waivers or the cost of individual arbitration means that class action waivers should not be enforced. The American Express decision broadly rejects these arguments and confirms the enforceability of class action waivers. It essentially means that a class action waiver will be enforceable unless there is a "contrary congressional command" in the statute, which is unlikely. Moreover the Court's specific reliance on Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U. S. 20 (1991) should significantly enhance employers' ability to enforce class action waivers in arbitration agreements relating to employment claims.

Employers should consider reviewing and revising their arbitration agreements in light of both the Oxford Health and American Express decisions.

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.

© Holland & Knight LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Holland & Knight LLP

Holland & Knight LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
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:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.