| Cost-Sharing Provision of Arbitration Clause Illegal and Unenforceable | |
| Description | Appeals court held that a provision in an employment arbitration clause requiring parties to share the costs of arbitration equally is illegal since Title VII allows a prevailing party to be awarded costs and fees. An arbitration clause may not be contrary to the rights provided in federal law. |
| Topic | Alternate Dispute Resolution |
| Key Words | Arbitration; Costs |
| C A S E S U M M A R Y | |
| Facts | Perez worked for Globe as a security agent at the Miami airport. To obtain employment, he has to sign an arbitration agreement that called for arbitration of any dispute relating to employment. The agreement stated that all costs of arbitration would be shared equally by the employee and the employer. After Perez was fired, she sued Globe for sex discrimination in employment. Globe moved to compel arbitration. The trial judge refused to compel arbitration, holding that the arbitration agreement was invalid. Globe appealed. |
| Decision | Affirmed. The provision in the arbitration agreement stating that the costs of arbitration would be shared equally was illegal and unenforceable in light of the fact that the agreement also required the employee to submit Title VII discrimination claims to arbitration and the fact that Title VII provides that a prevailing party is entitled to be awarded fees and costs. Since this aspect of the arbitration agreement is illegal and unenforceable, the entire arbitration agreement is unenforceable. |
| Citation | Perez v. Globe Airport Security Services, Inc., C F.3d C (2001 WL 649497, 11th Cir., 2001) |
Back to Alternate Dispute Resolution Listings
©1997-2002 SW Legal Studies in Business. All Rights Reserved.