In Silva v. Cross Country Healthcare, the California Court of Appeal ruled against a company's arbitration agreement due to unfair terms in a related employment agreement. The Court determined that both agreements, signed simultaneously, must be considered together. It found that the arbitration agreement, requiring employees to arbitrate all claims while allowing the employer favorable access to court, was unconscionable. Consequently, the appeal affirmed the trial court's decision to deny the employer's motion to compel arbitration, emphasizing the importance of fairness in arbitration contractual agreements.
The Court of Appeal affirmed that the Employment Agreement and Arbitration Agreement must be read together, acknowledging that unconscionable terms can invalidate arbitration agreements.
The ruling highlights the need for fairness in arbitration agreements, stressing that unfairly biased terms could render such agreements unenforceable in employment contexts.
Collection
[
|
...
]