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accepted when he entered its technology service agreement were barred by rulings in prior cases, the court said in an unpublished ruling.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.
Women who have served or are serving as arbitrators are invited to participate in a questionnaire regarding their experiences, with a deadline of 30 April. The project is an extension...
By Stacie StrongIn this episode of the Arbitration Conversation Amy interviews Janet Walker, an independent arbitrator with chambers at Arbitration Place in Toronto, at the International Arbitration Centre in London, and at...
By Janet Walker, Amy SchmitzA foundational principle of Arbitration is that it based on an agreement between the parties to submit their dispute for a binding decision by a neutral third party. The Federal...
By Jerome Rock
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.
