• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


Non-signatories Can Now Enforce International Commercial Arbitration Agreements on Equitable Estoppel Grounds

0
by Beth Graham

Monday, Jul 06, 2020


Tweet

University of Alberta Faculty of Law Assistant Professor Tamar Meshel has published “GE Energy v. Outokumpu: Non-signatories Can Now Enforce International Commercial Arbitration Agreements on Equitable Estoppel Grounds,” Harvard Business Law Review Online, Forthcoming.  In her scholarly work, Professor Meshel discusses a recent United States Supreme Court decision regarding whether a non-signatory is entitled to enforce an international commercial arbitration agreement can based on the doctrine of equitable estoppel.

Here is the abstract:

This essay comments on the Supreme Court’s recent decision in GE Energy Power Conversion France SAS, Corp. v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC, et al, rendered June 1, 2020. In this brief and unanimous decision, the Court reversed the Eleventh Circuit and resolved a question that has long been the subject of a Circuit split: Whether a non-signatory to an international commercial arbitration agreement can enforce it on the basis of the equitable estoppel doctrine. Answering this question in the affirmative, the Court brought the United States in line with international commercial arbitration practice. It also provided much-needed clarity and predictability in the enforcement of international arbitration agreements in the United States.

However, the Supreme Court’s narrow judgment left unresolved two related and equally contentious questions: First, whether international commercial arbitration agreements must be signed to be valid and enforceable in the United States, and second, how is the equitable estoppel doctrine to be formulated in this context and whether state or federal law governs its application. I examine these questions in light of the Court’s decision and its implications for non-signatories to international commercial arbitration agreements.

This and other journal articles written by Professor Meshel may be downloaded free of charge from the Social Science Research Network.

Photo by: Jon Tyson on Unsplash

Related Posts

  • Supreme Court of Texas Holds Non-Binding Mediation Renders a Debtor a “Settling Person”Supreme Court of Texas Holds Non-Binding Mediation Renders a Debtor a “Settling Person”
  • International Arbitration and Cycling | The Straight DopeInternational Arbitration and Cycling | The Straight Dope
  • Health Care Industry Leaders Respond to Senate Finance Committee Vote Health Care Industry Leaders Respond to Senate Finance Committee Vote
  • Fifth Circuit Affirms Arbitrator’s Decision in Insurance DisputeFifth Circuit Affirms Arbitrator’s Decision in Insurance Dispute
  • Southern District of Texas Compels Arbitration in Class-Wide Suit against AT&TSouthern District of Texas Compels Arbitration in Class-Wide Suit against AT&T
  • Fifth Circuit Rules that Arbitrator Bias Issue Must be Raised Before the Arbitration Award Is RenderedFifth Circuit Rules that Arbitrator Bias Issue Must be Raised Before the Arbitration Award Is Rendered

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Beth Graham

Beth Graham earned a Master of Arts in Information Science and Learning Technologies from the University of Missouri-Columbia, and a Juris Doctor from the University of Nebraska College of Law, where she was an Eastman Memorial Law Scholar. Beth is licensed to practice law in Texas and the District of Columbia. She is also a member of the Texas Bar College and holds CIPP/US, CIPP/E, and CIPM certifications from the International Association of Privacy Professionals.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy