These arbitration agreements often contain a provision that waives each party's right to bring claims in a class action lawsuit or class action arbitration, limiting each party to arbitrating the individual party's claims.
In a series of sharply divided opinions, the Supreme Court has interpreted the FAA as making class action waiver provisions in arbitration agreements generally enforceable, even when a plaintiff's claims for damages might be too small to justify the expense of arbitrating on an individual basis.
So long as a defendant can show a valid agreement to arbitrate and a valid class action waiver, then a putative class action plaintiff will be unable to proceed on a class basis.
Arbitration is a fairer, faster, and less expensive way to resolve disputes than time-consuming and expensive litigation.
If a court finds any evidence of substantive unconscionability, it will deem the agreement unenforceable. It does not take more than a low level of substantive unconscionability for the agreement to be thrown out.
1 In the context of arbitration, waiver occurs when a party consciously and intentionally gives up its right to arbitrate a particular dispute, thereby choosing litigation as the preferred method of dispute resolution.
Traditionally, to prove waiver of the right to arbitrate, a party must prove that (1) the waiving party had knowledge of an existing right to compel arbitration; (2) acted inconsistently with that existing rights; and (3) there was prejudice to the party opposing arbitration.
In 2014, the California Supreme Court ruled that class action waivers were permissible under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), and that the FAA preempted state laws to the contrary.
Arbitration agreements are subject to certain rules in order to have enforceability under California and federal law. If an arbitration agreement fails to meet these requirements, it can be held unenforceable.
In 2014, the California Supreme Court ruled that class action waivers were permissible under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), and that the FAA preempted state laws to the contrary.