In Uber Technologies Inc. v. Heller, 2020 SCC 16 (“Uber v. Heller”) the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision that Uber’s arbitration agreement is invalid and unenforceable, leaving disputes under the clause to be litigated in the courts. The Court re-affirmed the competence-competence principle and the deference generally afforded to arbitrators by the courts, while creating an exception to the general rule of arbitral referral. Background The case arises from…
Paris Court of Appeal, 25 February 2020, No. 17/18001 Prakash Steelage Ltd. (“Prakash Steelage” or “Respondent”), an Indian…
The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the Court has jurisdiction to compel the evidence of third party…
In a recent decision (Jock v. Sterling Jewelers Inc., No. 18-153-cv (2d Cir. Nov. 18, 2019)), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that an arbitrator’s determination of class arbitrability binds even non-party class members who did not affirmatively opt in to the arbitration proceeding. In 2008, the lead plaintiff filed the underlying lawsuit, alleging that Sterling Jewelers Inc. (“Sterling”) paid her and other female employees less than their male counterparts…
Dye v. Tamko, No. 17-14-052 (11th Cir. Nov. 2, 2018) [click for opinion] Two Florida residents purchased the same…
Recent Development The Law on the Execution Proceedings for the Collection of Monetary Receivables Arising out of Subscription…
Recom Corp. v. Miller Bros., No. 16-3320, (D.N.J. Aug. 16, 2018) [click for opinion] In June 2014, electrical contractor Miller Brothers (“Miller”) entered into a supply agreement with Recom Corp. to purchase solar panels for three construction projects in New Jersey. The supply agreement defined the “Contractor” as Miller and the “Vendor” as “Recom Corp…. its parents, subsidiaries, affiliates and assigns.” Recom Corp. did not procure the solar panels itself, despite being a party to…
Johnson v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 16 C 5468 (N.D. III. Sep. 20, 2018) [click for opinion] Plaintiff…
In a legal Opinion handed down on 16 May 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union…
Petitioner, Trina Solar US, Inc. (“Trina”), is a California company that manufactures and sells solar panels. In 2012, Trina began negotiations with Respondents, Australia-based Jasmin Solar Pty Ltd. (“Jasmin”) and Nevada-based JRC-Services LLC (“JRC”), for the sale of such solar panels. JRC acted in tandem with Jasmin in negotiating the purchase of solar panels from Trina. In November 2012, JRC executed a written sales contract (“Contract”) with Trina to purchase the solar panels. Jasmin was…