← All Authorities
United States arbitration agreements

Lamps Plus Inc v Varela

587 U.S. 176 (2019)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year2019
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Ambiguity in an arbitration agreement does not provide a sufficient basis for compelling class arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act.

Key Principle

Ambiguity in an arbitration agreement does not provide sufficient basis for compelling class arbitration under the FAA.

Area of Law

arbitration

Related Cases

Rinehart v Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd (2019) 267 CLR 514

A dispute must be referred to arbitration if it falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement, applying a generous interpretation in favour of arbitrability.

TCL Air Conditioner v Judges of the Federal Court (Arbitral Awards) [2013] HCA 5

Enforcement of international commercial arbitral awards does not involve arbitrators exercising judicial power; enforcement itself is a judicial function constitutionally vested in Chapter III courts.

Re Shift Energy Asia Limited [2025] HKCFI 6415

Court considered how the Guy Lam discretion operates where the existence of an arbitration agreement is itself in dispute.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Lamps Plus Inc v Varela and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Lamps Plus Inc v Varela