Mitsubishi Motors Corporation v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.

Facts of the Case

Provided by Oyez

These are two consolidated cases involving claims and counterclaims between the same parties. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., a Puerto Rico corporation, entered into distribution and sales agreements with Mitsubishi Motors, a Japanese corporation that manufactures automobiles in Japan. The sales agreement provided for arbitration by the Japanese Commercial Arbitration Association of all disputes arising out of certain articles of the agreement. A dispute did arise from slowing automobile sales. When the dispute could not be resolved, Mitsubishi sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico seeking an order to compel arbitration. Soler filed counterclaims, including Sherman Act antitrust violations. The district court ordered arbitration of all claims, holding that the international nature of the dispute required enforcement of the arbitration clause. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit reversed as to the antitrust claims.

Questions

Should an American court enforce an agreement to arbitrate antitrust claims when that agreement arises from an international transaction?

Conclusions

Yes. Justice Harry A. Blackmun, writing for a 5-4 majority, affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded. The Supreme Court held that claims arising under the Sherman Act and encompassed in a valid arbitration clause in an international commercial transaction are arbitrable under the federal Arbitration Act.

Justice John Paul Stevens dissented, arguing that a fair construction of the arbitration clause does not encompass antitrust claims. An arbitration clause should be construed to cover a remedy it does not expressly identify, and congress did not intend the federal Arbitration Act of apply to antitrust claims. Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. joined in the dissent. Justice Thurgood Marshall joined in all but part II of the dissent.