Uber Technologies Inc. failed to block a driver in California from suing in court on behalf of the state over whether he and other drivers were misclassified as independent contractors rather than employees and consequently were underpaid, a state appeals court ruled.
Both arguments the ride-sharing giant raised in its bid to reverse a lower court and to hold Jonathon Gregg to its view of the terms of the arbitration provisions he accepted when he entered its technology service agreement were barred by rulings in prior cases, the court said in an unpublished ruling.
Read the complete story here.
This article first appeared on the Arbitration Matters blog, here. In Shahcheraghi v Divangahi, 2021 BCSC 1576, Justice Horsman set aside the award of an arbitrator of the Residential Tenancy Branch...
By Lisa C. MunroIn this episode of the Arbitration Conversation, Amy interviews Prof. Carrie Shu Shang of Cal State Polytechnic University, Pomona on international arbitration and China's Belt and Road initiative. https://youtu.be/SePWUbOA3hE
By Carrie Shu Shang, Amy SchmitzThis article first appeared in Urbas Arbitral, here. In Malcolm Drilling Company Inc. v. The Graham-Aecon Joint Venture, 2021 BCSC 1136, Madam Justice Shelley C. Fitzpatrick issued a stay of proceedings...
By Daniel Urbas
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.