The principle of effective justification of material rights is indispensable if the courts are to justify closing the door of the courthouse to otherwise qualified parties to the proceedings. In a number of cases relating to consumer protection and labour law, the applicants argued that the application of declarations of waiver of collective actions would oblige the parties to the proceedings to waive their material rights and that no arbitration proceedings should therefore be necessary.19 These cases were not reviewed by Concepcion, because the Concepcion decision, as explained above, involved a conflict between the FAA and state law. and the Tribunal found that the law of the State was anticipated. On the other hand, the doctrine of effective justification is paramount when there is a potential conflict between the FAA and a federal law. The most direct way to tackle mandatory arbitration would be for Congress to amend the Federal Arbitration Act to exclude consumer and labor arbitrations, or for it to provide greater protection for consumer and worker rights in arbitration proceedings. While state-level legislation in this direction would almost certainly be anticipated by the FAA, laws passed by Congress would not face any such problems. The Supreme Court has considered the issue of compound arbitration and class action waivers on several occasions in recent years. In 2011, in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S.
333 (2011), it was decided that a California law that made class action waiver ruthless in most consumer cases was not valid because it had been anticipated by the FAA. In 2013, the Tribunal ruled in the case of American Express Co. Italian Colors Restaurant waived the class actions, although the plaintiffs showed that it would be impossible for them to defend their legal rights without a class action. Although Italian Colors has not been a case of work, it has a considerable impact on workers` rights under labor laws. 10 Between 1985 and 2015, the Supreme Court issued more than two dozen arbitrations, virtually all of which expanded the scope of the FAA and limited the ability of states to maintain laws protecting consumers and personnel and to oppose the ability of individuals to oppose expensive and unfair arbitration systems. Faced with such decisions, a party`s ability to challenge an arbitration clause on the basis of national law is reduced to a leakage point. The fundamental principle is that arbitration is based on a voluntary agreement between the parties, which requires the parties to voluntarily enter into an arbitration agreement before submitting disputes to arbitration. Section 16 of the Arbitration Act expressly provides that the parties agree on the subject matter of the arbitration and designate an arbitral institution in their arbitration agreement, and if the parties fail to reach agreement on these matters, the arbitration agreement shall be deemed invalid. In arbitration, a trained, professional and neutral arbitrator acts as a judge who makes a decision to end your dispute. Arbitrators are often retired judges, but that doesn`t mean they follow traditional legal procedures sewn into letters. Arbitration is actually a very flexible procedure, the basic rules of which are open to negotiation (for more differences between arbitration and mediation, do you also read the undecided in your dispute resolution procedure? Combine mediation and arbitration with Med-Arb). Prima Paint and its descendants allow a court to draw a potentially invalid arbitration agreement from a potentially invalid contract….