본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

Arbitration Clause Prohibiting Class Action in Consumer Contracts

1

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류무역학

초록

For recent years, several disputes between Korean consumers and multinational companies have arisen. Since the disputes were big and material that children’s safety was at issue, a question started if Korean law properly has protected consumers’ rights against multinational companies. While the Korean legal society tried to legislate punitive compensation with this concern, the U.S. Supreme Court reached an interesting case law regarding consumer contracts. A recent trend on consumer contracts in the United States shows that general terms have arbitration clause with class action waiver. As much as international arbitration has worked as the most effective resolution in international commercial disputes, the concept is still foreign and the experts are not approachable to lay individual consumers. However, class action in arbitration can hugely help for lay individual consumers to bring a case before arbitration tribunal. California courts consistently showed the analysis that the practical impact of prohibiting class action in arbitration clause is to ban lay individual consumers from fighting for their rights. However, the Supreme Court held that the arbitration clause shall be enforced as parties agree even if consumers practically cannot fight for their rights in the end. Even though consumer contracts are a typical example of lack of parity and of adhesive contract, the Supreme Court still applies liberalism that parties are equal in power and free to agree. This case law has a crucial implication since Korean consumers buy goods and services from the U.S. and other countries in everyday life. Accordingly, they are deemed to agree on the dispute resolution clauses, which might violate their constitutional right to bring their cases before the adjudication tribunal. This issue could be more important than adopting punitive compensation because consumers’ rights are not necessarily governed by Korean law but by the governing law of the general terms and conditions chosen and written by the multinational companies. Thus this paper studies and analyzes the practical reality of international arbitration and influence of arbitration clause with class action waiver with the U.S. Supreme Court and California case laws.

Abstract

For recent years, several disputes between Korean consumers and multinational companies have arisen. Since the disputes were big and material that children’s safety was at issue, a question started if Korean law properly has protected consumers’ rights against multinational companies. While the Korean legal society tried to legislate punitive compensation with this concern, the U.S. Supreme Court reached an interesting case law regarding consumer contracts. A recent trend on consumer contracts in the United States shows that general terms have arbitration clause with class action waiver. As much as international arbitration has worked as the most effective resolution in international commercial disputes, the concept is still foreign and the experts are not approachable to lay individual consumers. However, class action in arbitration can hugely help for lay individual consumers to bring a case before arbitration tribunal. California courts consistently showed the analysis that the practical impact of prohibiting class action in arbitration clause is to ban lay individual consumers from fighting for their rights. However, the Supreme Court held that the arbitration clause shall be enforced as parties agree even if consumers practically cannot fight for their rights in the end. Even though consumer contracts are a typical example of lack of parity and of adhesive contract, the Supreme Court still applies liberalism that parties are equal in power and free to agree. This case law has a crucial implication since Korean consumers buy goods and services from the U.S. and other countries in everyday life. Accordingly, they are deemed to agree on the dispute resolution clauses, which might violate their constitutional right to bring their cases before the adjudication tribunal. This issue could be more important than adopting punitive compensation because consumers’ rights are not necessarily governed by Korean law but by the governing law of the general terms and conditions chosen and written by the multinational companies. Thus this paper studies and analyzes the practical reality of international arbitration and influence of arbitration clause with class action waiver with the U.S. Supreme Court and California case laws.

참고문헌 (24)

  1. California Practical, "Guide Federal. Civil. Procedure. Before Trial Ch. 10-C Commentaries on Equity Pleadings § 97 (J. Gould 10th rev. ed. 1892)", ~ (1892)
  2. David Clancy, "An Uninvited Guest:Class Arbitration and the Federal Arbitration Act’s Legislative History", BUS. LAW, 63, pp.55~67 (2007)
  3. Elizabeth Sepper, "Free Exercise Lochnerism", Colum. L. Rev, 115, pp.1453~ (2015)
  4. F. Calvert, "A Treatise upon the Law Respecting Parties to Suits in Equity", pp.17~29 (1837)
  5. Gary Born, "The United States Supreme Courtand Class Arbitration:A Tragedy of Errors" (2012)
  6. "The Third Arbitration Trilogy: Stolt-Nielsen, Rent-A-Center, Concepcion and the Future of American Arbitration"[URL]
  7. Hazard, "An Historical Analysis of the Binding Effect of Class Suits", U. Pa. L.Rev, 146, pp.1849~1860 (1998)
  8. Kaplan, "A Prefatory Note", B.C. Ind. & Com. L.Rev, 10, pp.497~ (1969)
  9. Louise A. Halper, "Laissez-Faire Constitutionalism” and the Dilemmas of Small-Scale Property in the Gilded Age", Ohio St. L.J, 51, pp.1349~1363 (1990)
  10. Marcin, "Searching for the Origin of the Class Action", Cath. U.L.Rev, 23, pp.515~524 (1973)
  11. Michael A. Clithero, "Is Your Arbitration Clause Prohibiting Class Arbitration Enforceable?", Journal of the Missouri Bar (2013)
  12. S.I. Strong, "Class, Mass, and Collective Arbitration in National and International Law", pp.2.25~2.120
  13. S.I. Strong, "The Sounds of Silence: Are U.S. Arbitrator Creating Internationally EnforceableAwards in Cases of Contractual Silence or Ambiguity", MICH. J. INT'L L, 30, pp.1017~1049 (2009)
  14. S. Yeazell, "From Medieval Group Litigation to the Modern Class Action" (1987)
  15. "The President and fellows of Harvard college against JSC Surgutneftegaz", PLI, 2008, pp.770, 127~155
  16. Thomas Doyle, "Protecting Nonparty Class Members in Class Arbitration", A.B.A. J. LAB. & EMP. L, 25, pp.25~27 (2009)
  17. William H. Baker, "Class Action Arbitration", Cardozo J. Conflict Resolution, 10, pp.335~347 (2009)
  18. Yoonjik Kwak, "General Principles of Civil Law: Lecture on Civil Law 1" (2013), Bakyoungsa
  19. Z. Chafee, "Some Problems of Equity", pp.161~203 (1950)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (7건)