TRENTON, N.J. (Legal Newsline) – Arbitration agreements don’t have to provide the specifics of the process, the New Jersey Supreme Court has ruled.
In a win for Jenny Craig, the court rejected the argument that because the arbitration clause in an employment contract didn’t specify in what forum arbitration would take place, then the entire clause was invalid.
The decision reinstates a trial court ruling that was reversed by the Appellate Division. It also refutes the arguments of the New Jersey Association for Justice, the state’s trial lawyers group.
“We also agree with the Appellate Division that it may be advantageous for parties to designate in their agreement an arbitral organization but also provide an alternative method of choosing an organization should the parties’ primary choice be unavailable,” Justice Anne Patterson wrote.
“We do not, however, view the parties’ omission of a designated arbitral institution or general process for selecting an arbitration mechanism or setting to warrant the invalidation of an arbitration agreement.”
The agreement in question was signed in 2011 and invoked when an 82-year-old employee of Jenny Craig sued in 2017 after her hours were cut. She alleged age discrimination, among other things.
“Parties who have expressed mutual assent to the arbitration of their disputes instead of a court proceeding may choose to defer the choice of an arbitrator to a later stage,” Patterson wrote, “when they will be in a position to assess the scope and subject of the dispute, the complexity of the proposed arbitration, and considerations of timing and cost.”