United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland v. Boeing Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
998 F.2d 68 (1993)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
In 1981, a dispute arose between the government of the United Kingdom (United Kingdom) (plaintiff) and two corporations, Boeing and Textron (defendants). In January 1989, a United Kingdom military helicopter was damaged during Boeing’s testing of a new system designed by Textron. The United Kingdom had separate contracts with Boeing and Textron for certain services. The contracts both contained arbitration clauses that provided the parties would refer all disputes to arbitration under the American Arbitration Association (AAA) Rules in New York City. The United Kingdom filed a demand for arbitration against Boeing and Textron with the AAA after the January 1989 ground testing incident. Both before and after filing its demands for arbitration, the United Kingdom requested that Boeing and Textron consent to consolidation of the arbitration proceedings. Boeing refused, and the AAA informed the United Kingdom that it would not order consolidation of arbitration proceedings without the consent of all parties. The United Kingdom then filed a petition to compel consolidated arbitration in the district court. Citing Compania Espanola de Petroleos, S.A. v. Nereus Shipping, S.A., the district court held it could compel consolidation of separate arbitration proceedings when the proceedings involve the same questions of fact and law, even without the parties’ consent. Boeing appealed to the Second Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Meskill, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.