Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Arbitration, in the context of the law of the United States, is a form of alternative dispute resolution.Specifically, arbitration is an alternative to litigation through which the parties to a dispute agree to submit their respective evidence and legal arguments to a third party (i.e., the arbitrator) for resolution.
AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (2011), is a legal dispute that was decided by the United States Supreme Court. [1] [2] On April 27, 2011, the Court ruled, by a 5–4 margin, that the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925 preempts state laws that prohibit contracts from disallowing class-wide arbitration, such as the law previously upheld by the California Supreme Court in the case of ...
Discover Bank v. Superior Court (113 P. 3d 1100 (Cal. 2005)): Held a class action waiver in an arbitration clause unconscionable when disputes will involve small amounts of damages and are part of a scheme by a company with superior bargaining power to deliberately cheat many consumers (the "Discover Bank test").
Section 89(1) of CPC provides an option for the settlement of disputes outside the court. It provides that where it appears to the court that there exist elements that may be acceptable to the parties, the court may formulate the terms of a possible settlement and refer the same for arbitration, conciliation, mediation or judicial settlement.
Judicial Arbitration is, usually, not arbitration at all, but merely a court process which refers to itself as arbitration, such as small claims arbitration before the County Courts in the United Kingdom. [3] Online Arbitration is a form of arbitration that occurs exclusively online.
In contract law, a forum selection clause (sometimes called a dispute resolution clause, choice of court clause, governing law clause, jurisdiction clause or an arbitration clause, depending on its form) in a contract with a conflict of laws element allows the parties to agree that any disputes relating to that contract will be resolved in a specific forum.
The court nonetheless held that the convention was, at the least, an implemented non-self-executing treaty that still had legal force as a treaty (as distinguished from an Act of Congress). [7] Based on that determination, the court held that the Convention preempted state law that sought to void arbitration clauses in international reinsurance ...
Most arbitration clauses require parties to waive their right to proceed on a class action basis in either court or arbitration, [2] [nb 1] and, in the United States, the debate over consumer arbitration has also featured discussion of the merits of class actions. In 2011, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in AT&T Mobility v.