Superior Court of Pennsylvania finds Uber cannot compel arbitration based on browser app agreement.

The plaintiff claimed she was injured while riding in a vehicle requested through the Uber App. After she filed suit, the trial court granted Uber’s petition to compel arbitration. The Superior Court of Pennsylvania reversed, concluding that the plaintiff could not be deprived of her constitutional right to a jury trial based on purportedly entering into an arbitration agreement through a set of hyperlinked “terms and conditions” on a website or smartphone application that she never clicked on, viewed or read. The court reasoned that there must be an unambiguous manifestation of a party’s assent to arbitration through the following: (1) explicitly stating on the registration websites and application screens that a consumer is waiving a right to jury trial when they agree to the company’s “terms and conditions,” and the registration process cannot be completed until the consumer is fully informed of that waiver; and (2) when the agreements are available for viewing after a user has clicked on the hyperlink, the waiver should not be hidden in the “terms and conditions” provision but should appear at the top of the first page in bold, capitalized text. This case suggests that, in Pennsylvania, a party’s right to a jury trial will outweigh a party’s right to contract for arbitration absent a clear and conspicuous waiver.

_{Case Law Alerts, 1st Quarter, January 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2032 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}