The Supreme Court recently issued a decision addressing the issue of class arbitration. In Stolt-Nielson S.A. v. Animalfeeds International Corp., No. 08-1198 (April 27, 2010), an antitrust class action involving allegations of illegal price-fixing by international shipping companies, the Court held that an arbitration panel’s decision to force class arbitration was invalid because the arbitration agreement was silent about whether arbitration could proceed on a class basis.
Beyond its impact in cases involving class arbitration and the interpretation of arbitration clauses in domestic disputes, the decision partially closes the door on arbitration as a possible global forum for litigating class actions. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals had upheld the arbitration panel’s decision to compel class arbitration and certify a class of all purchasers worldwide of the defendants’ shipping services. The Supreme Court’s decision leaves open the possibility of global class arbitration based on an arbitration agreement that expressly permits class arbitration, but class arbitration cannot be compelled simply because the agreement is silent on the issue.
Elena Kagan and Class Actions
Posted in Class Action News, tagged across-the-board, class action commentary, elena kagan, falcon, kagan, sotomayor, u.s. supreme court, unity of interest on May 18, 2010 | Leave a Comment »
When the Supreme Court nomination of then-Judge Sonia Sotomayor was announced, I put together this summary of her fairly significant judicial record on class action issues. Finding any record on class action issues for current nominee Elena Kagan has been more of a challenge, since she has not served as a judge. However, Solicitor General Kagan does have a background as a Civil Procedure and Constitutional Law professor, and she has written at least one article addressing class actions. Professor Adam Steinman at the Civil Procedure & Federal Courts Blog has posted an excerpt from that article, Certifying Classes and Subclasses in Title VII Suits, 99 Harv. L. Rev. 619 (1986). In that excerpt, Kagan appears to argue for a middle ground between what at the time were two competing models for class certification in Title VII employment discrimination cases. Her scholarship from 25 years ago is hardly a barometer for how she might rule on any issue today, but might it be support for those who argue that she would be a voice of compromise on the Court if confirmed?
Read Full Post »