Case Comment: Heller v. Uber Technologies Inc.

Abstract

In Heller v. Uber Technologies Inc., the Ontario Court of Appeal held that the arbitration clause contained in the agreement between Uber and its drivers was invalid on two separate grounds. First, the clause amounted to an illegal contracting out of the Employment Standards Act. Second, the Court held that the clause was unconscionable. In this comment, the author analyzes the Court of Appeal’s decision and discusses the potential significance of the unconscionability holding. The Court’s reasoning can be used to hold other arbitration clauses unconscionable based on the fact that they preclude class actions involving individually small claims. However, the precedential value of Heller may be limited by its particular facts, which involved a foreign arbitration and significant up-front costs to the plaintiff.

Keywords: unconscionability, arbitration clause, mandatory arbitration, standard form contracts, contracts of adhesion