We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 20

Court refuses to enforce arbitration agreement for lack of consent
  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • USA
  • December 14 2011

Recently, the Northern District of California refused to compel arbitration of discrimination claims where an employee refused to sign an acknowledgment of a new mandatory arbitration agreement that expressly stated that continued employment constituted acceptance of the agreement


U.S. Supreme Court Supports Validity of Class-Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements
  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • USA
  • December 21 2015

On December 14th, the United States Supreme Court ruled in DirecTV v. Imburgia, in a 6-3 decision, that California consumers can be bound by the


But no agreement to arbitrate where agreement contains PAGA waiver that was not severable
  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • USA
  • February 18 2015

When an arbitration agreement contained an unenforceable waiver of claims under California's Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA") and the agreement


Buyer permitted to enforce arbitration agreement with acquired company’s employees
  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • USA
  • February 18 2015

A California court of appeal ruled in Marenco v. DirecTV, LLC that DirecTV could enforce an arbitration agreement between a company it purchased and


Six-month claims limitations period in arbitration agreement unconscionable
  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • USA
  • February 20 2013

In Bowlin v. Goodwill Industries of Greater East Bay, Inc., a California federal district court found Goodwill's requirement, as part of an


Class action waivers in arbitration agreements still viable, but vulnerable, in California
  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • USA
  • December 18 2012

A California Court of Appeals held in Franco v. Arakelian Enterprises, Inc. that the United States Supreme Court decisions in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. V


Court enforces arbitration and class action waiver policy, but allows time to assert PAGA claims
  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • USA
  • August 14 2014

Following the California Supreme Court's decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation (reported in the July 2014 FEB), a California federal district


Employer cannot waive unconscionable portions of arbitration agreement
  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • USA
  • August 25 2015

Finding that an employment arbitration agreement was procedurally and substantively unconscionable, a U. S. District Court for the Northern District


Mixed bag on arbitration agreements enforceability questions may be delegated to arbitrator, but agreements still subject to scrutiny
  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • USA
  • June 17 2014

A U.S. Supreme Court order and California appellate court decision highlight the continued attention to, and evolving area of the law on


Post-Concepcion, arbitration agreements still subject to Armendariz test
  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • USA
  • June 15 2012

A California Court of Appeal recently affirmed the applicability of the Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychare Services, Inc. standard for assessing unconscionability challenges to arbitration agreements, notwithstanding the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion