Canadian Court Sides With Dell Against Class Actions

An anonymous reader writes "Michael Geist reports that the Supreme Court of Canada has just issued a new online contracting decision that removes the ability for consumers to challenge mandatory arbitration clauses found in e-commerce contracts. (Decision is here.) The case involved a lawsuit against Dell Computer, which refused to sell hundreds of mistakenly priced computers purchased on their website. Dell tried to sidetrack a class action by claiming that all consumers were required to enter arbitration due to a clause buried in its contract via a hyperlink. Geist explains why the ruling may not be as unfavorable for Canadian consumers as it seems at first, in part because some provinces have already passed laws banning e-commerce sites from blocking class-action suits."

Comments

Good idea

[saleenS281]

A website makes a pricing mistake, all the trolls hop on, then they cry when the deal they KNEW couldn't be true, wasn't true. Well heck, let's just SUE THEM! Thank you for reminding me just how pathetic this society has become.

Re:Good idea

[Tuoqui]

Lets put it this way... if Dell found a bug that was overcharging customers do you honestly think they'd pay back all the money to the customers they rightfully owed? Probably not. The law cuts both ways, if Dell let a pricing bug in their system GO LIVE, then they are obligated to honor those contracts.

Of course, we could just go back to dealing with customers face to face instead of clicking 'Buy Now!' on a website if you want to make sure you (as a company) are not being scammed.

Re:Good idea

[HitekHobo]

And where do you live where there is free speech and respect for individual liberty?

As far from civilization as possible?

Re:Good idea

[Tuoqui]

Maybe if companies put their EULA/Policies/whatever legal crap they have in PLAIN ENGLISH instead of super complicated legalese then people might actually read the crap. I know for a fact that you can buy a Dell computer from their website without ever being flashed their policies and terms of sale.

I'm sorry but as for terms of sale, anything beyond 'I give you cash, you give me a machine' is complete and utter bullshit. That is one reason why I do not buy crappy dell computers.

Oh and that arbitration thing, its so that they cant get class action lawsuits against them for shit like say... oh I dont know... say an exploding dell laptop.

Its time for companies (and governments to back the citizens up) that they cant avoid class action lawsuits by putting it in some stupid little blurb which nobody will ever click on and that willful negligence (like the laptop battery thing) should void any arbitration agreements.

Re:Good idea

[sumdumass]

What if the printer printed it wrong and not the store? Does the store get screwed?

Wait a minute

[Anonymous Coward]

Dell *may* try to claim that thier customer's have to submit to arbitration, but until they actually *sell* the damn pieces of shit they call computers the "agrieved" parties are most definitely *not* customers. Sounds like they're trying to have it both ways. Full disclosure: I *hate* DELL.

relative to what?

[oohshiny]

many of the articles posted by Mr. Dawson are so obviously (left-)biased,

"Biased" relative to what?

And what is "biased" about criticizing the administration for imprisonment without due process, for violating privacy rights, for funneling billions to their buddies in industry without any oversight or review, for torture, and for lying in order to get us into a war?

Maybe the problem is that you're so right wing and so politically narrow minded that even moderate opinions seem "left-biased" to you.

Dunno about arbitration, but...

[itsdapead]

The case involved a lawsuit against Dell Computer, which refused to sell hundreds of mistakenly priced computers purchased on their website.

Maybe we aren't crying salty tears for Dell, but this sounds like exactly the sort of silly, greedy, "protect my constitutional right to get something for nothing" lawsuit that these arbitration clauses are intended to head off. Its not as if Dell are trying to force these customers to complete the purchase at full price, is it? If you are forced into arbitration because BigCorp have come round and claimed your first born (in accordance with para. 796, subsection y of the invisible terms of service) then save some of the blame for these guys (this is assuming, of course, that the arbiter actually turns out to be the BigCorp CEOs brother in law, and doesn't actually help you).

Before citing "bait and switch" and "fair competition", think of the smaller traders who would be harmed by simply having to defend against a bogus class action because they missed out a zero on their web shop, some bozo posted the to slashdot and 30 minutes later they had "sold" ten thousand $1000 laptops for $100 each.

I don't kow what happens in the US/Canada, but in the UK we have trading standards authorities who could investigate and prosecute traders in the event of a real "bait and switch" scam rather than leaving it to vigilante lawyers. Not saying they're efficient mind (too busy burning counterfieters at the stake to protect the right of brand name owners to get $50 for a $5 shirt with their logo) but the principle is sound.