A recent arbitration case is a good reminder that contract drafting deserves more attention than it often gets. A few takeaways for lawyers and business owners:

* When multiple contracts govern the same relationship, make your arbitration clauses consistent. In this new case of Sudbury v Konsker, different contracts between the parties pointed to different arbitration rules. The court found no actual conflict between those rules, so it didn’t matter. But it could have. Good lawyering catches that discrepancy before it becomes a dispute about the dispute.

* A venue clause and an arbitration clause in the same contract are not in conflict. I still see lawyers treat these clauses as contradictory. They’re not. Some disputes may fall outside arbitration. Enforcing arbitration may require court involvement. These clauses serve different functions, and courts will read them to give meaning to both.

* “Arising out of or relating to” remains the gold standard for arbitration clause scope. It is the broadest language available, and it sweeps tort claims into the ambit of your arbitration agreement. I continue to marvel at lawyers who use narrower phrasing without intending to limit scope. If you want comprehensive coverage, use the magic words.

A note for business owners: When was the last time someone reviewed your standard forms and existing contracts? An experienced attorney in your area should be able to confirm the existence and current validity of your venue, jury waiver, arbitration, and liability limitation clauses in about an hour of work. That’s a small investment to avoid a big surprise.

Here’s the case: https://lnkd.in/eYY_yc69