The Supreme Court of Maine has affirmed an order denying Uber’s motion to compel arbitration of claims that it and its subsidiary violated the Maine Human Rights Act. The action was filed after an Uber driver refused to drive plaintiff Patricia Sarchi, who is blind, because of her guide dog. Uber moved to compel arbitration pursuant to the terms and conditions of its user agreement. The plaintiffs (Sarchi and the Maine Human Rights Commission) argued that the manner in which the terms were presented rendered them, and the arbitration agreement, unenforceable…
Read the complete story here.
Most investors do not understand the difference between two types of financial advisors who they often rely on for investment advice. These are Registered Investment Advisers (“RIAs”) and broker-dealers. A...
By Brittany MunnThis article first appeared on the Practical Law Arbitration Blog, here. What happens after a claimant successfully obtains an arbitral award against the respondent? Where a respondent is unwilling to comply with...
By Christopher Tan, Christina LiewIn this episode of the Arbitration Conversation Amy interviews Morenike Obi-Farinde, Founder of the ODRAfrica Network and managing partner of the law firm of ADIGUN OGUNSEITAN & CO. in Lagos,...
By Morenike Obi-Farinde, 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.
