Parties seeking to compel arbitration often rely on the rule that where an arbitration agreement contains broad language, any ambiguity about whether a claim must be arbitrated should be resolved in favor of arbitration. The Eleventh Circuit, in reversing a decision by the Northern District of Georgia, recently relied on that rule in finding that a cable subscriber agreement containing an arbitration clause “related to” a dispute arising after the termination of the subscriber agreement. Hearn v. Comcast Cable Commc’ns, LLC, 992 F.3d 1209 (11th Cir. 2021). But the Eleventh Circuit remanded to the district court to determine whether the arbitration clause was too broad to be enforced against a consumer of cable services, describing the enforceability issue as “a close question.”
Read the complete story here.
This article first appeared on the Securites Arbitration Alert (SAA) Blog here. FINRA has issued a Regulatory Notice reminding industry parties on the proper use of predispute arbitration agreements (“PDAA”)...
By George FriedmanWhen Arbitrator Intelligence promised to increase transparency, accountability, and diversity in arbitrator selection, it was celebrated as a welcome innovation. Now separated from its academic backing, however, it might accomplish...
By Katherine SimpsonIn this episode of the Arbitration Conversation Amy interviews Prof. S.I. Strong of the University of Sydney about trust arbitration and new laws in New Zealand. https://youtu.be/QhMxassqMvY
By Stacie Strong, Amy Schmitz
With the purchase of a Featured Membership, you will be shown on the front page of Arbitrate.com to web site visitors from your city and region (“state” if you are in the USA). You may appear in more than one city/region by purchasing additional locations.