Edition:
United Kingdom

On The Case Headlines

SCOTUS sleeper case: The never-ending battle over who gets to decide arbitrability

Nearly a quarter-century ago, the U.S. Supreme Court boldly asserted in First Options of Chicago v. Kaplan (115 S.Ct. 1920) that the question of whether a federal court or an arbitrator has the primary power to decide if a dispute is arbitrable was “fairly simple.” Arbitration is a matter of contract, the court said. If the two sides agreed to submit the threshold question of the enforceability of their arbitration contract to an arbitrator, that’s who should decide it. If the contra

Tesla, Musk face SEC wrist slap at worst, experts say

Tesla CEO Elon Musk and the company itself may have little to fear from U.S. regulators according to legal analysts, despite Musk's failure so far to back up his early August tweet saying he had "funding secured" for his plan to take the electric car maker private.

From the 11th Circuit, a cautionary tale for employers imposing arbitration on workers

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling last term in Epic Systems v. Lewis (138 S.Ct. 1612) was a great victory for employers. In Epic, you’ll recall, the justices held, in a 5-4 opinion written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, that companies can require employees to waive the right to arbitrate as a group. In combination with Supreme Court precedent backing employers’ power to impose mandatory arbitration provisions to resolve disputes with their workers, the Epic opinion effectively means that com

3rd Circuit rules banks can’t push clients out of FINRA arbitration, breaks with 2nd, 9th

In 2016, after two federal appellate courts upheld forum selection clauses requiring issuers of auction-rate securities to go to court with claims against underwriter Goldman Sachs, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority felt compelled to issue a stern reminder to the banks and brokerages in its membership: When they run into disputes with customers, FINRA said, they’re supposed to use FINRA arbitration to resolve the issues. The industry self-regulator warned its members that t

Six global banks should face terror-funding claims by U.S. military vets - judge

A U.S. magistrate judge in Brooklyn has recommended that more than 200 former U.S. soldiers or their survivors be allowed to proceed with allegations that six global financial institutions – HSBC, Credit Suisse, Barclays, Standard Chartered, Royal Bank of Scotland and Commerzbank – conspired with Iran and its proxies to provide material support for terrorism against U.S. armed forces during the Iraq War.

Judges to DOJ: Don’t overread Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. Hawaii

The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 26 decision in Trump v. Hawaii (138 S.Ct. 2392) was a colossal win for President Trump and his Department of Justice. The five justices in the Supreme Court majority upheld President Trump’s modified ban on travel to the U.S. from six predominantly Muslim countries. Under the extremely deferential standard of review for presidential national security decisions, the court held, President Trump had ample justification for the travel ban.