Automobile Manufacture Cannot Leverage Purchaser’s Agreement With Dealer To Compel Arbitration

In Guan v. BMW of North America, LLC, a California District Court, acknowledging a split of authority, held that an automobile manufacturer could not compel arbitration of a purchaser’s claims regarding defects in a new car based on a provision in the purchase agreement that required arbitration of claims between the purchaser and the dealer or the dealer’s “employees, agents, successors or assigns.” The court held that, “while acknowledging there exists a split of authority as to whether a vehicle manufacturer can enforce such an arbitration provision on the basis of equitable estoppel or as a third-party beneficiary, finds more persuasive the reasoning of the decisions addressing essentially the same arguments raised here by BMW and finding the manufacturer cannot enforce the provision.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s