A Case Study on Consumer Arbitration Clause and Arbitrability

When trying to resolve disputes between companies and consumers through arbitration, companies prefer arbitration because they have the bargaining power and competitiveness to proceed with legal reviews, while consumers sometimes refuse arbitration for the purpose of protecting their rights as economically weak people. Since Korea's arbitration law does not provide special provisions for consumers in relation to the method of arbitration agreement, consumers may not be able to accurately recognize the meaning and content of the arbitration clause. But the United States recognizes arbitration favorably from the standpoint of companies and consumers and resolves disputes through arbitration as a means of resolving disputes. In the United States, most consumer contracts generally include arbitration agreements, depending on the reasons for arbitration preference. In this paper, since the U.S. Federal Arbitration Act does not provide a separate provision for the possibility of arbitration, it tends to determine the possibility of arbitration through court precedents. By reviewing the precedents discussed in the United States regarding the possibility of arbitration on consumer disputes, we intend to review the U.S. court's position on the “Arbitrability” and derive implications for the activation of arbitration in Korean companies and consumers' disputes through the factors derived through case analysis.