Abstract

 
 

Footnotes (69)



 


 



Arbitration and Access to Justice: Economic Analysis


Omri Ben-Shahar


University of Chicago Law School

January 2013

University of Chicago Institute for Law & Economics Olin Research Paper No. 628

Abstract:     
Mandatory arbitration clauses in consumer contracts are widely regarded as problematic because they limit consumer’s access to judicial forums, to fair procedures, and potentially to any kind of remedy. But rather than looking at consumers as a group, I examine which sub groups of consumers are affected by this limitation more than others. I argue that in most circumstances, access to courts benefits the elite, not the weak. It is a species of open-access policy that has an unintended regressive effect. Paradoxically, rules that limit the use of pre-dispute arbitrations clauses hurt, rather than protect, weaker consumers, as they mandate a regressive reallocation. I also consider the role of class actions, and whether weak consumers are potentially the indirect beneficiaries of class action litigation. This argument has theoretical merit, but it, too, is limited in ways that are often unappreciated.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 28

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: January 6, 2013 ; Last revised: January 10, 2013

Suggested Citation

Ben-Shahar, Omri, Arbitration and Access to Justice: Economic Analysis (January 2013). University of Chicago Institute for Law & Economics Olin Research Paper No. 628. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2197013 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2197013

Contact Information

Omri Ben-Shahar (Contact Author)
University of Chicago Law School ( email )
1111 E. 60th St.
Chicago, IL 60637
United States
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,003
Downloads: 335
Download Rank: 42,273
Footnotes:  69

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.359 seconds