• 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


Update on Arbitration Provisions in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act

0
by Victoria VanBuren

Friday, Feb 24, 2012


Tweet

As readers may recall, on July 21, 2010 President Barack Obama signed into law the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 (a.k.a. the “Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act”). House Versions: H.R. 4173 and Congressional Actions. The final version of P.L. 111-517 (H.R. 4173) is here.

The Act, whose goal was to “promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, to end `too big to fail’, to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices…” contained several arbitration-related provisions. Following is an update on some of these provisions:

  • With respect to Section 748 of the Act, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission issued its final rule implementing this Section on August 25, 2011. See 76 Fed.Reg. 53172.

SEC. 748. COMMODITY WHISTLEBLOWER INCENTIVES AND PROTECTION. The Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:…..‘‘(n) NONENFORCEABILITY OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS WAIVING RIGHTS AND REMEDIES OR REQUIRING ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES.—

‘(1) WAIVER OF RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.—The rights and remedies provided for in this section may not be waived by any agreement, policy form, or condition of employment including by a predispute arbitration agreement

‘‘(2) PREDISPUTE ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS.—No predispute arbitration agreement shall be valid or enforceable, if the agreement requires arbitration of a dispute arising under this section.’’.

  • The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) has not yet proposed any rules as directed by Section 921.

SEC. 921. AUTHORITY TO RESTRICT MANDATORY PRE-DISPUTE ARBITRATION. (a) AMENDMENT TO SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934.—Section 15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78o), as amended by this title, is further amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: ‘‘(o) AUTHORITY TO RESTRICT MANDATORY PRE-DISPUTE ARBITRATION.— The Commission, by rule, may prohibit, or impose conditions or limitations on the use of, agreements that require customers or clients of any broker, dealer, or municipal securities dealer to arbitrate any future dispute between them arising under the Federal securities laws, the rules and regulations thereunder, or the rules of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that such prohibition, imposition of conditions, or limitations are in the public interest and for the protection of investors.’’. (b) AMENDMENT TO INVESTMENT ADVISERS ACT OF 1940.—Section 205 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b–5) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: ‘‘(f) AUTHORITY TO RESTRICT MANDATORY PRE-DISPUTE ARBITRATION.— The Commission, by rule, may prohibit, or impose conditions or limitations on the use of, agreements that require customers or clients of any investment adviser to arbitrate any future dispute between them arising under the Federal securities laws, the rules and regulations thereunder, or the rules of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that such prohibition, imposition of conditions, or limitations are in the public interest and for the protection of investors.’’.

  • With regards to the implementation of Section 922: (1) the SEC has issued its final rule. See 76 Fed. Reg. 34300 and (2) the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) has filed with the SEC proposed amendments to FINRA Rules 13201 and 2263 of the Code of Arbitration Procedure for Industry Disputes (available here).

SEC. 922. WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 21E the following:….‘‘(e) NONENFORCEABILITY OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS WAIVING RIGHTS AND REMEDIES OR REQUIRING ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES.—

‘‘(1) WAIVER OF RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.—The rights and remedies provided for in this section may not be waived by any agreement, policy form, or condition of employment, including by a predispute arbitration agreement.

‘‘(2) PREDISPUTE ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS.—No predispute arbitration agreement shall be valid or enforceable, if the agreement requires arbitration of a dispute arising under this section.’’.

  • Under Section 1028, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) created by the Act, will conduct a study regarding the use of pre-dispute arbitration agreements between consumers and covered persons.

SEC. 1028. AUTHORITY TO RESTRICT MANDATORY PRE-DISPUTE ARBITRATION.(a) STUDY AND REPORT.—The Bureau shall conduct a study of, and shall provide a report to Congress concerning, the use of agreements providing for arbitration of any future dispute between covered persons and consumers in connection with the offering or providing of consumer financial products or services.(b) FURTHER AUTHORITY.—The Bureau, by regulation, may prohibit or impose conditions or limitations on the use of an agreement between a covered person and a consumer for a consumer financial product or service providing for arbitration of any future dispute between the parties, if the Bureau finds that such a prohibition or imposition of conditions or limitations is in the public interest and for the protection of consumers. The findings in such rule shall be consistent with the study conducted under subsection (a).

(c) LIMITATION.—The authority described in subsection (b) may not be construed to prohibit or restrict a consumer from entering into a voluntary arbitration agreement with a covered person after a dispute has arisen.

(d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any regulation prescribed by the Bureau under subsection (b) shall apply, consistent with the terms of the regulation, to any agreement between a consumer and a covered person entered into after the end of the 180-day period beginning on the effective date of the regulation, as established by the Bureau.

Stay tuned.

 

Technorati Tags:
ADR, law, arbitration

Related Posts

  • Wall Street Reform Signed Into Law: Arbitration ProvisionsWall Street Reform Signed Into Law: Arbitration Provisions
  • Financial Reform Bill Moves into House-Senate Committee: Limits on Predispute Arbitration ClausesFinancial Reform Bill Moves into House-Senate Committee: Limits on Predispute Arbitration Clauses
  • SEC Commissioner Speaks on Mandatory ArbitrationSEC Commissioner Speaks on Mandatory Arbitration
  • U.S. Arbitration and Mediation Legislative UpdateU.S. Arbitration and Mediation Legislative Update
  • Arbitration and Mediation Legislative Update | April, 2012Arbitration and Mediation Legislative Update | April, 2012
  • Arbitration and Mediation Legislative Update | March, 2012Arbitration and Mediation Legislative Update | March, 2012

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 Victoria VanBuren

Born and raised in Mexico, Victoria is a native Spanish speaker and a graduate of the Monterrey Institute of Technology (Instituto Tecnologico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey), or "the MIT of Latin America." She concentrated in physics and mathematics. Immediately after completing her work at the Institute, Victoria moved to Canada to study English and French. On her way back to Mexico, she landed in Dallas and managed to have her luggage lost at the airport. Charmed by the Texas hospitality, she decided to stay and made her way back to Austin, which she's adopted as home.

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