Brush Arbor Home Constr. LLC v. Alexander (P)

The circuit court erred in denying the defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. Under the broad scope of the arbitration clause at issue, the question of which rules were required by the arbitration clause was an issue for the arbitrator to decide.

The plaintiffs argue that contractual language requiring arbitration using the Better Business Bureau’s rules is unenforceable because the Bureau hasn’t promulgated its own rules. The parties’ disagreements over the interpretation of the contract, as well as the application of the doctrine of impossibility to this article of the contract, are arbitrable as controversies or claims arising out of or relating to this contract, or the breach thereof.

The arbitrator will need to interpret the arbitration clause, determine whether the impossibility defense applies, and resolve the plaintiffs’ underlying claims as necessary.

Reversed and remanded.

Brush Arbor Home Constr. LLC v. Alexander (P), No. 180454, Feb. 21, 2019. SCV (McCullough) from Loudoun (Sincavage).

Categories: Opinions, Published, Supreme Court of Virginia

Tags: ,

%d bloggers like this: