Desirability of international class arbitration

Contemporary Issues in International Arbitration and Mediation: The Fordham Papers

Volumn 2, Issue , 2009, Pages 171-181

  Freyer, Dana H ^a   Litt, Gregory A ^a  

^a Meagher and Flom LLP   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84966539954     PISSN: 22107053     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1163/ej.9789004175556.i-382.61     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. See, e.g., Green Tree Fin. Corp v. Bazzle, 539 U.S. 444 (2003)
2. Stolt Nielsen SA v. Animalfeeds Int'l Corp., 548 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2008)
3. JSC Surgutneftegaz v. President and Fellow of Harvard Coll., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79161 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 11, 2007).
4. ICC Commission on Commercial Law and Practice, Class Action Litigation, Policy Statement, Document No. 460/585 (2005), available at http://www.iccwbo.org/uploadedFiles/ICC/policy/clp/Statements/Classactionlitigation.pdf.
5. S.L. Strong, "Enforcing Class Arbitrations in the International Sphere: Due Process and Public Policy Concerns," 30(1) U. Pa. J. Int'l L. 1, 5 (2008).
6. President and Fellows of Harvard Coll v. JSC Surgutneftegaz, AAA Case No. 11 168 T 01654 04.
7. See JSC Surgutneftegaz v. President and Fellows of Harvard Coll., 167 F. App'x 266 (2d Cir. 2006).
8. President and Fellows of Harvard Coll v. JSC Surgutneftegaz, AAA Case No. 11 168 T 01654 04, Partial Final Award on Clause Construction, Aug. 1, 2007.
9. Stolt-Nielsen SA v. Animalfeeds Int'l Corp., 435 F. Supp. 2d 382 (S.D.N.Y. 2006).
10. See President and Fellows of Harvard Coll v. JSC Surgutneftegaz, AAA Case No. 11 168 T 01654 04, Partial Final Award on Clause Construction, at 16-20 (discussing Stolt-Nielsen).
11. Stolt Nielsen SA v. Animalfeeds Int'l Corp., 548 F.3d 85, 99-110 (2d Cir. 2008).
12. U.S. courts following Green Tree Financial Corp v. Bazzle, 539 U.S. 444 (2003), have similarly avoided imposing their public policy view.
13. For instance, in Johnson v. Long John Silver's Restaurants, Inc., 320 F. Supp. 2d 656, 668 & n. 7 (M.D. Tenn. 2004), aff'd, 414 F.3d 583 (6th Cir. 2005), the court observed that "foreclosing the possibility of a class action would force an individual plaintiff to bear the entire cost of proving a [violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act] because the benefit to any individual plaintiff is small," but found that under Bazzle, the question was left up to the arbitral tribunal.
14. President and Fellows of Harvard Coll v. JSC Surgutneftegaz, AAA Case No. 11 168 T 01654 04.
15. See, e.g., Dell Computer Corp v. Union des consommateurs, [2007] S.C.C. 34, ¶ 106 (Canada) ("It is accepted that the class action has a social dimension: Its purpose is to facilitate access to justice for citizens who share common problems and would otherwise have little incentive to apply to the courts on an individual basis to assert their rights." - internal quotation marks omitted).
16. Clancy and Stein have also noted several reasons why a class arbitration may actually be more burdensome on the parties than a class litigation. The clause construction phase is unique to arbitration, as is the need to pay arbitrators, which can be a substantial or even prohibitive burden on the parties. See David S. Clancy & Matthew M.K. Stein, "An Uninvited Guest: Class Arbitration and the Federal Arbitration Act's Legislative History," 63(1) Bus. Law. 55, at 63-64, 73 (2007).
17. President and Fellows of Harvard Coll v. JSC Surgutneftegaz, AAA Case No. 11 168 T 01654 04.