Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Court Watch
U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator's Determination of Authority to Determine Class Issues
'In Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter ___ U.S. ___, 2013 WL 2459522 (June 10, 2013), the U.S. Supreme Court attempted 'to clarify its decision in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. Animal Feeds Int'l Corp., 559 U.S. 662 (2010), which held that arbitrators may employ class procedures only if the parties authorized them to do so. The arbitration provision in Oxford Health Plans did not specifically allow or disallow an arbitrator to consider class clams. It simply contained an 'all disputes' clause, found in many standard arbitration agreements, worded as follows: 'No civil action concerning any dispute arising under this Agreement shall be instituted before any court, and all such disputes shall be submitted to final and binding arbitration in New Jersey, pursuant to the rules of the American Arbitration Association with one arbitrator.'
On its face, that provision does not appear to authorize class claims. A court's decision, following Stolt-Nielsen, to refuse to order the class action into arbitration might appear correct. Both Justices Alioto and Thomas, in a concurring opinion, agreed that if they were acting on a clean slate, they would have held that the arbitrator was not authorized to determine class issues. However, the parties complicated matters in Oxford Health by stipulating that the arbitrator could decide class issues. Had they not done so, the case may have come out differently.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?