Equitable Estoppel SOMETIMES Allows a Non-Signatory the Right to Compel Arbitration

“Where a contract subjects to arbitration claims between certain enumerated parties, that limiting language matters. Under appropriate circumstances, a non-signatory might invoke equitable estoppel to access an arbitration clause, but not to excavate it and fill it with new terms.” Florida Roads Trucking, LLC v. Zion Jacksonville, LLC, 49 Fla.L.Weekly D819a (Fla. 5th DCA 2024). Arbitration is a creature of contract. In Florida Roads Trucking, a non-signatory to a contract tried to compel arbitration of a dispute arguing that the arbitration provision in the plaintiff’s contract with another party should apply. This argument is based on a theory of equitable estoppel: Florida and federal...

21 March

0 Comments

Sticky

Non-Signatory Compelling Arbitration based on Equitable Estoppel

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

Many times, parties will prefer to arbitrate their disputes instead of litigate their disputes. Because arbitration is a creature of contract, an arbitration provision must be included in the parties’ contract. There are pros and cons to arbitration and it is important to discuss these pros and cons with your counsel when negotiating a contract that includes an arbitration provision. The pros and cons may change over time. (For example, in this COVID-19 world, there are pros with arbitration that did not exist before the COVID-19 pandemic.) Notwithstanding, there are instances where a non-signatory to the contract with the arbitration provision...