Necessity Never Made a Good Bargain: When Consumer Arbitration Agreements Prohibit Class Relief

36 Pages Posted: 26 Jun 2010 Last revised: 1 Jul 2010

See all articles by Thomas V. Burch

Thomas V. Burch

University of Georgia School of Law

Date Written: January 1, 2004

Abstract

Courts rely on the "national policy favoring arbitration" to restrict the review of arbitration agreements under state laws of unconscionability. Consequently, banks, phone companies, and other consumer businesses implement mandatory arbitration clauses that provide complete immunization from both class actions and classwide arbitrations. As potential defedants, these companies hope that courts will force individual resolution of all consumer claims against them by upholding their agreements to arbitrate. Such an exercise raises an important question, which is the subject of this Article: To what extent should courts use the "national policy favoring arbitration" to protect consumer arbitration agreements that prohibit all class relief?

Suggested Citation

Burch, Thomas V., Necessity Never Made a Good Bargain: When Consumer Arbitration Agreements Prohibit Class Relief (January 1, 2004). Florida State University Law Review, Vol. 31, p. 1005, 2004, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1630900

Thomas V. Burch (Contact Author)

University of Georgia School of Law ( email )

225 Herty Drive
Athens, GA 30602
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
56
Abstract Views
759
rank
523,443
PlumX Metrics