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 was first published in the Indian Review of International Arbitration (IRIArb) journal. For more information about the journal, see here. On April 19, 2021, the Second Version of...
By Abhisar Vidyarthi, Sikander Hyaat KhanThis article first appeared in the Securities Arbitration Alert Blog here. We reported in December that the Supreme Court had granted Certiorari in four cases involving arbitration. The Court has just set...
By George FriedmanIn this episode of the Arbitration Conversation Amy interviews Nicolás Lozada Pimiento, a partner of the firm Rincón Cuéllar & Asociados and professor of arbitration, trade and business law at...
By Nicolas Pimiento, 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.