Originally from Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation

PAGE PREVIEW

The U.S. Supreme Court returned to the basics of class arbitration in April, examining whether consent to class arbitration may be inferred from ambiguous contract language.

Nearly a decade after determining party consent to class processes was fundamental, the Court asserted that class-arbitration decision makers can’t infer consent using a policy— not intent—based contract construction rule.

The 5-4 opinion written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. in Lamps Plus Inc. v. Varela, 587 U.S. ___, No. 17-998 (April 24, 2019) (available at http://bit.ly/2GxwFbC), held that ambiguity wasn’t enough to infer party consent to class arbitration. Parties would have to clearly express their consent to class arbitration before courts could impose it on them under the Federal Arbitration Act.