Consumer Arbitration
Abstract
This article compares four jurisdictions and their differing approaches to consumer arbitration. This particular subject raises questions of access to justice, fairness, and public policy. As stated by the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators[1] the issues with regard to consumer arbitration are:
- the imbalance between the parties in terms of resources; and
- the ability to afford professional help for the presentation and making of legal cases.
The jurisdictions focussed on in this article are (i) the United Kingdom, (ii) the European Union, (iii) the United States of America, and finally (iv) Thailand.
For each jurisdiction, statutory provisions are considered, as well as case law or legal analysis when the jurisdiction in question does not have a precedent case. The article therefore demonstrates the variance in approaches a court might take in London compared to Verona and highlights similar themes faced by all consumers when engaged in arbitration.
References
Practice Guideline 17: Guidelines for Arbitrators dealing with cases involving consumers and parties with significant differences of resources’ https://acica.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/2011-consumers-and-parties-with-significant-differences-of-resources.pdf
Chitty on Contracts 34th Ed. Incorporating First Supplement, 40-426
Unfair Arbitration Agreements (Specified Amount) Order 1999 (SI 1999/2167)
Julia Hörnle Legal Controls on the Use of Arbitration Clause in V2C E-Commerce Contracts pp. 32-33; Chitty on Contracts 34th Ed. Incorporating First Supplement, 40-426
Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, paragraph 20
Unfair contract terms guidance, Guidance on the unfair terms provisions in the Consumer Rights Act 2015, 31 July 2015, 5.29.3
Mylcrist Builders Limited v Mrs G Buck [2008] EWHC 2172 TCC, paragraphs 2-3
Mylcrist Builders Limited v Mrs G Buck [2008] EWHC 2172 TCC, paragraph 8
Mylcrist Builders Limited v Mrs G Buck [2008] EWHC 2172 TCC, paragraph 7
Mylcrist Builders Limited v Mrs G Buck [2008] EWHC 2172 TCC, paragraphs 10, 14-15
Mylcrist Builders Limited v Mrs G Buck [2008] EWHC 2172 TCC, paragraph 55
Section 61, Consumer Rights Act 2015
Chitty on Contracts 34th Ed. Incorporating First Supplement, 40-244
Chitty on Contracts 34th Ed. Incorporating First Supplement, 40-244; Law Com. Advice (2013), paragraph 7.100
Chitty on Contracts 34th Ed. Incorporating First Supplement, 40-244
2015 Act s.2(4) as applied to Pt 2 by s.76(3).
Payward Inc and Others v Chechetkin [2023] EWHC 1780 (Comm), paragraphs 23, 30
Payward Inc and Others v Chechetkin [2023] EWHC 1780 (Comm), paragraph 53
Payward Inc and Others v Chechetkin [2023] EWHC 1780 (Comm), paragraph 114
Payward Inc and Others v Chechetkin [2023] EWHC 1780 (Comm), paragraph 62
Payward Inc and Others v Chechetkin [2023] EWHC 1780 (Comm), paragraph 111
Payward Inc and Others v Chechetkin [2023] EWHC 1780 (Comm), paragraph 113
Payward Inc and Others v Chechetkin [2023] EWHC 1780 (Comm), paragraphs 132-145
Payward Inc and Others v Chechetkin [2023] EWHC 1780 (Comm), paragraphs 134, 140-145
Zealander & Zealander v Laing Homes Ltd (2000) 2 T.C.L.R. 724, page 724
Zealander & Zealander v Laing Homes Ltd (2000) 2 T.C.L.R. 724, page 724
Zealander & Zealander v Laing Homes Ltd (2000) 2 T.C.L.R. 724, pages 725, 727-728
Picardi v Cuniberti [2002] EWHC 2923 (QB), paragraph 131
Westminster Building Co Ltd v Andrew Beckingham [2004] EWHC 138 (TCC), paragraph 1
Westminster Building Co Ltd v Andrew Beckingham [2004] EWHC 138 (TCC), paragraph 2
Westminster Building Co Ltd v Andrew Beckingham [2004] EWHC 138 (TCC), paragraph 31
Westminster Building Co Ltd v Andrew Beckingham [2004] EWHC 138 (TCC), paragraph 32
Colleen Althea Du Plessis v Fontgary Leisure Parks Limited [2012] EWCA Civ 409, 2012 WL 1067754, paragraph 57
Eternity Sky Investments Ltd v Mrs Xiaomin Zhang [2023] EWHC 1964 (Comm), paragraph 4
Eternity Sky Investments Ltd v Mrs Xiaomin Zhang [2023] EWHC 1964 (Comm), paragraph 4
Eternity Sky Investments Ltd v Mrs Xiaomin Zhang [2023] EWHC 1964 (Comm), paragraphs 16, 18-19
Eternity Sky Investments Ltd v Mrs Xiaomin Zhang [2023] EWHC 1964 (Comm), paragraphs 16-17
Eternity Sky Investments Ltd v Mrs Xiaomin Zhang [2023] EWHC 1964 (Comm), paragraphs 19, 21, 30-31, 33
Eternity Sky Investments Ltd v Mrs Xiaomin Zhang [2023] EWHC 1964 (Comm), paragraph 55
Eternity Sky Investments Ltd v Mrs Xiaomin Zhang [2023] EWHC 1964 (Comm), paragraphs 55
See Practical Law Arbitration, ‘Court rejects public policy challenge to enforcement of international arbitration award alleged to engage consumer protection (English Commercial Court)’
Ola Svensson, ‘The Unfair Contract Terms Directive: Meaning and Further Development’, page 24
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3186531 (abstract)
http://arbitrationblog.practicallaw.com/consumer-class-arbitration-in-the-uk-where-we-are-and-what-next/ ‘Consumer class arbitration in the UK: where we are and what next?’
http://arbitrationblog.practicallaw.com/consumer-class-arbitration-in-the-uk-where-we-are-and-what-next/ ‘Consumer class arbitration in the UK: where we are and what next?’
Karin Sein ‘Protection of Consumers against Unfair Jurisdiction and Arbitration Clauses in Jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice’ https://www.juridicainternational.eu/article_full.php?uri=2011_XVIII_54_protection-of-consumers-against-unfair-jurisdiction-and-arbitration-clauses-in-jurisprudence-of-the-european-court-of-justice
Karin Sein ‘Protection of Consumers against Unfair Jurisdiction and Arbitration Clauses in Jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice’ https://www.juridicainternational.eu/article_full.php?uri=2011_XVIII_54_protection-of-consumers-against-unfair-jurisdiction-and-arbitration-clauses-in-jurisprudence-of-the-european-court-of-justice; Case 1.4.2004, C-237/02, Freiburger Kommunalbauten GmbH Baugesellschaft & Co. KG v. Ludger Hofstetter and Ulrike Hofstetter, paragraph 20. – ECR 2004, p. I-03403.
Karin Sein ‘Protection of Consumers against Unfair Jurisdiction and Arbitration Clauses in Jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice’ https://www.juridicainternational.eu/article_full.php?uri=2011_XVIII_54_protection-of-consumers-against-unfair-jurisdiction-and-arbitration-clauses-in-jurisprudence-of-the-european-court-of-justice
Karin Sein ‘Protection of Consumers against Unfair Jurisdiction and Arbitration Clauses in Jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice’ https://www.juridicainternational.eu/article_full.php?uri=2011_XVIII_54_protection-of-consumers-against-unfair-jurisdiction-and-arbitration-clauses-in-jurisprudence-of-the-european-court-of-justice
Karin Sein ‘Protection of Consumers against Unfair Jurisdiction and Arbitration Clauses in Jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice’ https://www.juridicainternational.eu/article_full.php?uri=2011_XVIII_54_protection-of-consumers-against-unfair-jurisdiction-and-arbitration-clauses-in-jurisprudence-of-the-european-court-of-justice; Oceano (Note 1), paragraph 29; Case 21.11.2002, C-473/00, Codifis, paragraph 38. – ECR 2002, p. I-10875.
Karin Sein ‘Protection of Consumers against Unfair Jurisdiction and Arbitration Clauses in Jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice’ https://www.juridicainternational.eu/article_full.php?uri=2011_XVIII_54_protection-of-consumers-against-unfair-jurisdiction-and-arbitration-clauses-in-jurisprudence-of-the-european-court-of-justice; Mostaza Claro (Note 2), 25, 26, 38
Karin Sein ‘Protection of Consumers against Unfair Jurisdiction and Arbitration Clauses in Jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice’ https://www.juridicainternational.eu/article_full.php?uri=2011_XVIII_54_protection-of-consumers-against-unfair-jurisdiction-and-arbitration-clauses-in-jurisprudence-of-the-european-court-of-justice; Mostaza Claro (Note 2), 39
Asturcom Telecomunicaciones SL v. Cristina Rodríguez Nogueira [C 40/08], paragraph 2
Asturcom Telecomunicaciones SL v. Cristina Rodríguez Nogueira [C 40/08], paragraph 20
Asturcom Telecomunicaciones SL v. Cristina Rodríguez Nogueira [C 40/08], paragraph 20
Asturcom Telecomunicaciones SL v. Cristina Rodríguez Nogueira [C 40/08], paragraphs 22, 33
Asturcom Telecomunicaciones SL v. Cristina Rodríguez Nogueira [C 40/08], paragraph 24
Karin Sein ‘Protection of Consumers against Unfair Jurisdiction and Arbitration Clauses in Jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice’ https://www.juridicainternational.eu/article_full.php?uri=2011_XVIII_54_protection-of-consumers-against-unfair-jurisdiction-and-arbitration-clauses-in-jurisprudence-of-the-european-court-of-justice; Asturcom Telecomunicaciones SL v. Cristina Rodríguez Nogueira [C 40/08], paragraph 26
Asturcom Telecomunicaciones SL v. Cristina Rodríguez Nogueira [C 40/08], paragraph 27
Andrew Dickinson, ‘Unfair arbitration clause before the ECJ’ https://conflictoflaws.net/2009/unfair-arbitration-clause-before-the-ecj/; Asturcom Telecomunicaciones SL v. Cristina Rodríguez Nogueira [C 40/08], paragraph 59
Menini v Banco Popolare Societa Cooperativa [C-75/16], paragraph 1
Menini v Banco Popolare Societa Cooperativa [C-75/16], paragraph 15
Menini v Banco Popolare Societa Cooperativa [C-75/16], paragraph 28
National law can provide for compulsory mediation before court action’; EU Focus 2017, 357, 14-15, page 14; Menini v Banco Popolare Societa Cooperativa [C-75/16], paragraph 28
National law can provide for compulsory mediation before court action’; EU Focus 2017, 357, 14-15, page 14
National law can provide for compulsory mediation before court action; EU Focus 2017, 357, 14-15, pages 14-15
Imre Stephen Szala, ‘The Prevalence of Consumer Arbitration Agreements by America’s Top Companies’, UC Davis Law Review Online, 52, 233-259, page 234
Imre Stephen Szala, ‘The Prevalence of Consumer Arbitration Agreements by America’s Top Companies’, UC Davis Law Review Online, 52, 233-259, page 235
Amy J. Schmitz, ‘American Exceptionalism in Consumer Arbitration’, Loyola University Chicago International Law Review Volume 10, Issue 1 (2012) 81-103, page 87; Green Tree Financial Corp. v Randolph 531 U.S. 79 (2000) 91-2
https://www.consumeradvocates.org/for-consumers/arbitration/
Consumer Protection Act B.E. 2522, Section 4
Ms. Duangkamon Soponawat, “Problems Concerning to Arbitration Clauses in Adhesive Consumer Contract”, Thammarat University, 2003, Page 179.
Ms. Duangkamon Soponawat, “Problems Concerning to Arbitration Clauses in Adhesive Consumer Contract”, Thammasat University, 2003, Page 64-65.
Announcement of the Committee on Contracts Re: Consumer Loan Business is a contract-controlled business B.E. 2565 (2022)
Announcement of the Committee on Contracts Re: Car and motorbike hired-purchase business is a contract-controlled business B.E. 2565 (2022)
Announcement of the Committee on Contracts Re: Residential building rental business is a contract-controlled business B.E. 2561
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 THAC Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
