Thomson CSF, S.A. v. Am. Arbitration Assoc'n

64 F.3d 773 (1995)

From our private database of 46,400+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Thomson CSF, S.A. v. Am. Arbitration Assoc'n

United State Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
64 F.3d 773 (1995)

Facts

In 1986 Rediffusion Simulation Limited (Rediffusion) (defendant), a British company that made flight simulators, entered into a working agreement with Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation (E.S.) (defendant). Under the working agreement, Rediffusion agreed to purchase the computer equipment for flight simulators exclusively from E.S. and, in return, E.S. agreed to supply the equipment exclusively to Rediffusion. The working agreement also contained an arbitration clause, and the agreement purported to bind Rediffusion and “each of its affiliates.” Rediffusion was subsequently sold twice, and ultimately sold to Thomson CSF, S.A. (Thomson) (defendant). During the course of the acquisition, E.S. informed Thomson that, if Thomson purchased Rediffusion, E.S. intended to bind Thomson to the terms of the working agreement and the requirement to purchase equipment from E.S. Without conceding that the working agreement would be binding on Thomson, Thomson wrote to E.S. seeking to have the requirements waived, which E.S. declined to do. Thereafter, and directly prior to the acquisition of Rediffusion, Thomson explicitly stated to E.S. that Thomson was not adopting the working agreement and that Thomson did not consider itself bound by the agreement, because Thomson had neither negotiated nor signed the working agreement. After the acquisition, a dispute arose between the parties, and E.S. filed a demand for arbitration against both Rediffusion and Thomson. Rediffusion did not contest the applicability of the arbitration clause, but Thomson filed suit in federal district court, seeking a declaration that it was not bound by the arbitration clause. E.S. filed a cross-motion to compel arbitration. The district court granted E.S.’s motion to compel arbitration. In doing so, the court reasoned that although Thomson did not sign the working agreement, and none of the claims fit under the five traditional categories for binding a nonsignatory to an arbitration agreement, Thomson was nonetheless bound by the arbitration clause because it voluntarily became an “affiliate” of Rediffusion and exercised control over Rediffusion. Thomson appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Altimari, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 830,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,400 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership