At least in theory, mutual assent remains a cornerstone of contract law and thus of arbitration. The tricky part has become understanding what counts as mutual assent in a world where overwhelming empirical evidence, not to mention our own lived experience, demonstrates that no one reads standardized terms and conditions, including arbitration provisions buried in
This post is aimed at drafters of arbitration clauses. Because if you don’t insert an administrator for your arbitration, and don’t anticipate that the administrator may just stop providing services, your arbitration clause is dead in the water. At least, that’s the holding of two new state court cases.
In the past week, the Third Circuit has issued two important decisions on the formation of arbitration agreements. (Sing it Beyoncé! “Okay ladies, now let’s get in formation.”) In one, a class action was allowed to proceed in court because the defendant did not obtain explicit enough agreement to the arbitration, and in another an
A few months ago, the Ninth Circuit found that the arbitration agreement in Barnes & Noble’s website was not enforceable. This week, the Ninth Circuit found that the arbitration agreement Sirius XM Radio relied upon was not enforceable because the user did not know he had any agreement with Sirius XM, let alone an arbitration
In a case between an on-line customer and Barnes & Noble, the Ninth Circuit recently refused to enforce the arbitration agreement found in the website’s “Terms of Use.” Nguyen v. Barnes & Noble Inc., __ F.3d__, 2014 WL 4056549 (9th Cir. Aug. 18, 2014). The decision further calls into question the validity of “browsewrap”