Document: 417 U.S. 506 94 S.Ct. 2449. 41 L.Ed.2d 270 Fritz SCHERK, Petitioner,v.ALBERTO-CULVER COMPANY. No. 73—781. Argued April 29, 1974. Decided June 17, Rehearing Denied, Oct. 15, See 419 885, 95 157. Syllabus Respondent, an American manufacturer based in Illinois, order to expand its overseas operations, purchased from petitioner, a German citizen, three enterprises owned by him and organized under the laws of Germany Liechtenstein, together with all trademark rights these enterprises. The sales contract, which was negotiated United States, England, Germany, signed Austria, closed Switzerland, contained express warranties petitioner that trademarks were unencumbered clause providing 'any controversy or claim (that) shall arise out this agreement breach thereof' would be referred arbitration before International Chamber Commerce Paris, France, Illinois govern interpretation performance. Subsequently, after allegedly discovering subject substantial encumbrances, respondent offered rescind but when refused, brought suit District Court damages other relief, contending petitioner's fraudulent representations concerning violated § 10(b) Securities Exchange Act 1934 Rule 10b—5 promulgated thereunder. Petitioner moved dismiss action alternatively stay pending arbitration, denied motion and, as sought respondent, preliminarily enjoined proceeding holding, reliance on Wilko v. Swan, 346 427, 74 182, 98 L.Ed. 168, unenforceable. Appeals affirmed. Held: is respected enforced federal courts accord explicit provisions States Arbitration agreement, such here involved, 'shall valid, irrevocable, enforceable, save upon grounds exist at law equity for revocation any contract.' 9 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2. supra, distinguished. Pp. 510—520. (a) Since uncertainty will almost inevitably respect one question here, contacts two more countries, each own substantive conflict-of-laws rules, contractual provision specifying advance forum litigating disputes applied indispensable precondition achieving orderliness predictability essential international business transaction. Such obviates danger contract dispute might submitted hostile interests parties unfamiliar problem area involved. 515—517. (b) In context advantages security buyer possess having wide choice venue litigate his claims violations securities laws, become chimerical, since opposing party may speedy resort foreign court block hinder access buyer's choice. 517—518. (c) An arbitrate specified tribunal is, effect, specialized kind forum-selection posits not only situs also procedure used resolving dispute, invalidation case allow repudiate solemn promise would, well, reflect 'parochial concept must resolved our courts.' Bremen Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 9, 92 1907, 1912, 32 513. P. 519. 484 F.2d 611, reversed remanded. Robert F. Hanley, Evanston, Ill., petitioner. Gerald Aksen Association, amicus curiae, special leave Court. Francis J. Higgins, Chicago, respondent. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered opinion 1 Alberto-Culver company incorporated Delaware principal office Illinois. It manufactures distributes toiletries hair products country abroad. During 1960's decided part program it approached Scherk, citizen residing time trial Switzerland. Scherk owner interrelated entities, engaged manufacture licensing toiletries. initial contact made representative 1967, negotiations followed further meetings both Europe during 1967 1968. February 1969 Vienna, provided transfer ownership Scherk's Alberto-Culver, along held cosmetic goods. number whereby guaranteed sole trademarks. addition, '(t)he State U.S.A. apply performance.'1 2 closing transaction took place Geneva, 1969. Nearly year later discovered encumbrances threatened give others superior restrict preclude Alberto-Culver's use them. thereupon tendered back property had been transferred contract. Upon refusal, commenced relief Federal status constituted 1934, 48 Stat. 891, 15 78j(b), thereunder, 17 CFR 240.10b—5. 3 response, filed want personal subject-matter jurisdiction well basis non conveniens, or, alternatively, Paris pursuant parties. AlbertoCulver, turn, opposed preliminary injunction restraining prosecution proceedings.2 On December 2, 1971, dismiss, January 14, 1972, granted enjoining arbitration. taking actions relied entirely Court's decision could seeking judicial remedy 1933, view language 14 Act, barring '(a)ny condition, stipulation, binding person acquiring waive compliance subchapter . ..' 84, 77n.3 Seventh Circuit, judge dissenting, affirmed, what considered controlling authority decision. 611. Because importance presented we petition writ certiorari. 414 1156, 913, 39 108. 4 * now et seq., reversing centuries hostility agreements,4 designed avoid 'the costliness delays litigation,' agreements 'upon same footing contracts H.R.Rep.No.96, 68th Cong., 1st Sess., (1924); see S.Rep.No.536, Sess. (1924). Accordingly provides involved 2.5 proceedings where satisfied issue arbitrable directs proceed if there has 'failure, neglect, refusal' honor arbitrate. 5 acknowledged reflects legislative recognition 'desirability alternative complications U.S., 431, S.Ct., 185, nonetheless declined Act's provisions. That between Anthony Hayden, Stone & large brokerage firm, agreed purchase margin shares corporation's common stock. alleged stock induced false defendant value shares, he 12(2) 77l. responded submit controversies arising written parties, should given full effect Act. 6 found '(t)wo policies, easily reconcilable, are case.' 438, 188. hand, stressed need avoiding delay expense id., directed 'valid, enforceable' courts. 1933 '(d)esigned protect investors' require 'issuers, underwriters, dealers make fair disclosure character sold interstate commerce prevent fraud their sale,' creating 'a right recover misrepresentation 184 (footnote omitted). particular, noted 77n, provides: 7 'Any rules regulations Commission void.' 8 ruled 'is 'stipulation,' select 'provision' cannot waived Act.'6 434—435, 186. Thus, Wilko's subsequently unenforceable terms 1933. relying precedent, contends correct holding similarly contentions conduct For reasons follow, reject contention hold ignored case. 10 At outset, colorable argument even semantic reasoning does control us. concerned defrauded purchaser 'special right' private civil liability, 184. There no statutory counterpart neither nor speaks redress here. While established create implied cause action, L. Loss, Regulation 3869—3873 (1969) cases cited therein; cf. J.I. Case Co. Borak, 377 426, 84 1556, 12 423, itself establish significant. Furthermore, while contain sections waiver respective Acts,7 certain 'provisions' find jurisdictional 77v, allowed plaintiff bring 'in competent jurisdiction—federal state—and removal state prohibited.' analogous contrast, district have 'exclusive jurisdiction,' 78aa, thus significantly restricting plaintiff's forum.8 11 Accepting premise, however, operative portions respondent's ignores significant find, crucial differences entities belonging truly agreement. corporation vast bulk activity country, whose companies Liechtenstein. leading signing Austria Switzerland consultations legal experts those countries Finally, most significantly, matter sale primarily situated European activities largely, entirely, markets. involves considerations policies different Wilko. Wilko, quite apart provision, generally, stock-purchase negotiations, credible entertained problems arise. case, absence considerable existed still exists, applicable resolution contract.9 13 touching rules. A litigated therefore, achievement involved.10 parochial refusal enforce frustrate purposes, invite unseemly mutually destructive jockeying secure tactical litigation advantages. present example, inconceivable anticipated able enjoin France some States. Whatever ultimately court, dicey atmosphere no-man's-land surely damage fabric trade, imperil willingness ability businessmen enter into commercial agreements.11 exception clear carved simply inapposite reasoned '(w)hen buyer, prior violation waives sue courts, gives up than participant transactions. wider venue. He surrenders 435, 187. chimerical since, indicated above, purchaser's choice.12 16 Two Terms ago 513, rejected doctrine although voluntarily adopted "unless selected provide convenient brought." Id., 7, 1912. Rather, concluded 'forum absent strong showing set aside.' 1916. We 'much possibly great inconvenience maintained accident occur left (where rem established). elimination uncertainties agreeing acceptable element commerce, contracting.' 13—14, 1915. dispute.13 us trade world markets waters exclusively terms, governed 1912.14 18 Act.15 19 Accordingly, judgment remanded directions remand consistent opinion. 20 so ordered. 21 Reversed 22 DOUGLAS, whom BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL concur, dissenting. 23 Respondent (Alberto-Culver) publicly traded New York Stock corporation, (Scherk) Firma Ludwig dealing cosmetics various outstanding Liechtenstein (SEV) Lodeva. licensed manufacturers distributors country. SEV collected royalties licenses. 24 Alberto undertook entire establishment—the corporations; later, alleging defrauded, obtain damages. 25 defense material stage arises agree settled 'exclusively' Commerce, France. 26 basic allegations assets encumbered through serious instances omissions agents within If principle controlling. 27 questions 3(a)(10) defines 'security' including 'note, stock, treasury bond, debenture, certificate interest participation profit-sharing 78c(a)(10). Tcherepnin Knight, 389 332, 88 548, 564, respects 3(a)(10): 28 '(R)emedial legislation construed broadly effectuate purposes. clearly falls category remedial legislation. One central purposes investors requirement issuers securities, definition necessarily determines classes investments receive protections. remainded that, searching meaning scope word form disregarded substance emphasis economic reality.' 336, 553. (Footnote omitted.) 29 Section makes unlawful agencies mails '(t)o employ, connection security,' whether registered national exchange, manipulative deceptive device contrivance contravention prescribe.' 78j(b). 30 noted, listed Exchange. believed, words proved, issuance 'securities' (promissory notes) worthless much lower represented. 10b—518 states: 31 'It person, directly indirectly, means instrumentality facilitity '(a) To employ device, scheme, artifice defraud, 33 '(b) untrue statement fact omit necessary statements made, light circumstances they misleading, 34 '(c) engage act, practice, course operates operate deceit 35 security.' 29(a) 36 chapter rule regulation exchange required thereby 78cc(a). 37 And 29(b) adds '(e)very contract' void.'1 No character. 38 like 14: 40 customer against house until occurred 3, customer's 'stipulation' 'waive' accordingly tribunals, over suits agency, held, bound standards said: 'As protective exercise direction fairly assure effectiveness, seems Congress intended review.' 437, 42 properly so. 43 consider saying raised urge support favor (save venue, Peoria R. 263 528, 536, 44 194, 197, 68 427. Railway Express 265 425, 435—436, n. 11, 560, 563 1087), passed below below. Langnes Green, 282 531, 535—539, 51 243, 244—246, 75 520; Walling General Industries 330 545, 547 5, 67 883, 884, 91 1088. 615. brief premise here; questioned ruling Appeals. perhaps argued because little pitted big house, deal sophisticated buyers sellers: powerful operator, surrounded protected lawyers experts. But miss point problem. speak 'sophisticated' 'unsophisticated' people securities. giants play pygmies market. 45 victims thousands who holders Alberto-Culver. promissory notes excessive, impact 46 Moreover, market days host small scrambling get stocks overshadowed huge institutional traders.2 so-called 'off-shore funds,' member, perplexing Acts.3 tendency invest indirectly mutual funds4 change need. 47 disputes; way settling disagreements. B quarreling trade-mark policy implementing Nations Convention Recognition Enforcement Foreign Arbitral Awards, did 201 prevail. substitute arbiter settlement Acts. Art. II(3) says: 'The Contracting State, seized article, shall, request refer unless finds said null void, inoperative incapable being performed.'5 (1970) U.S.T. 2517, 2519, T.I.A.S. 6997. 49 liabilities 'void' 'inoperative.' precise Alberto-Culvers Nation operate. They conditions, corporate principalities power guardians wards unable care themselvs. tries protect.6 Not governing awards adopts peculiarly appropriate adhere Wilko—more decided. Huge companies. important fairness dealings destinies changes standards. 50 unnecessary distinguishable unequal bargaining strength. Ante, 512—513, 6. Instead, rests conclusion 'international' investing businesses, favorably certainty inheres specify arbitral countries.' This invocation 'international talisman situation where, fund utterly unsophisticated misrepresentations appear fine print sufficient recourse forcing vindicate rights.7 52 recognized protections 10b-5, applies defendants investors, particularly when, here,8 profited virtue proscribed boundaries. true conducting outside therefore largely law.9 immunize transactions, 'inoperative' contrary public policy.10 When undertakes subjects nothing justifies diluted version protects investors. 53 stipulation provision' expressly jurisdiction' s 78aa. appears attach significance specific duplicated either 184, deprives heard court. spoke length problem, elucidating undesirable effects remitting arbitral, rather judicial, forum. Here, involve 'subjective findings purpose knowledge' defendant, ill-determined arbitrators without instruction law. award can explication development record, arbitrator's conception absolutely incorrect yet functionally unreviewable, arbitrator seeks review corresponding decisions. 436—437, 187—188. extensive pretrial discovery Rules Civil Procedure available. forfeited. loss proper carries rights.11 54 has, acts territory, ken regulation, disputed laws—including principles Wilko—apply American, transnational elements dealings. Those rendered chimera corporations funds—unlike domestic defendants—can nullify them clauses send soil, afford far-off forum, all. 55 aura ominous. many multinational operations around world—Europe, Latin America, Middle East, Asia.12 turn Up day, assumed reason guarantees removed, take enactment. I stand, exception. 56 important, dictated apply, expressed precedence. renders void inoperative, recognizes incidentally factors. II(3). does, afforded full-fledged. relating similar covering two, reads entirety follows: thereof accordance then obtaining single arbitrator, one, appointed third arbitrators. failure appointment above four weeks notice controversy, Chamber. All agrees comply entry proceeding. performance.' taken steps initiate early 1971. not, file formal November five months filing complaint memorandum unreported. English traditionally irrevocable 'ousting' jurisdiction, refused reason. adoption H.R.Rep.No. 96, Sturges Murphy, Some Confusing Matters Relating Law Contemp.Prob. 580. maritime evidencing involving .,' defined 1. Bernhardt Polygraphic 350 198, 76 273, 100 199, kinds 'commerce nations,' covers standard dissenting Frankfurter, 439, 440, 189, concluding record show (Wilko) opening account accept limit situations exhibit disparity power, years sides knowledgeable experts, apply. Judge Stevens disposition grounds, contention. 78cc(a), identical, variations wording seem irrelevant do reach, imply to, acquisition businesses 10b—5. Although Appeals, opinion, post, p. 521, controlling, assign adverse error briefed Together dismissed transaction, Leasco Data Processing Equipment Corp. Maxwell, 468 1326 (CA2 1972). granting appealed, Quigley, Accession 70 Yale L.J. 1049, 1051 (1961). Illinois,' determination existence extent understanding subject. argues inapplicable vitiate force transactions direct invoke 'talisman' Post, 529. Concededly, insignificant attenuated meaningfully Judicial response await future concrete cases. determine face elsewhere. occurrence some—but greater part—of pre-contract 'American fairness,' demeans justice elsewhere world, unnecessarily exalts primacy countries. raises specter today mercy 'vast 533. Our decision, course, bearing simple 8, supra. Under circumstances, designation viewed implicitly selecting Illinois' explicitly 'should effect' freely (is) unaffected 13, 12, 1915, 1914. qualification mean allegation fraud, enforceable inclusion product coercion. Cf. Prima Paint Flood Conklin Mfg. 388 395, 87 1801, 1270. decide question, presumably type raised, V infra, challenging enforcement whatever produced Article V(2)(b) refuse 'recognition country.' confirmed developments subsequent 10, 1958, conference Economic Social Council Awards. 1970 acceded treaty, 6997, Chapter implement Convention. new chapter, 201, unequivocally chapter.' goal Convention, underlying implementation it, encourage unify observed signatory S. Exec. Doc. E, 90th 2d (1968): 1049 II(1) 'Each recognize writing undertake arisen relationship, capable arbitration.' discussion Article, delegates voiced frequent concern permitted decline views desirability manner diminish nature agreements. G. Haight, Awards: Summary Analysis Record Conference, May/June pp. 24—28 (1958). Without reaching think country's ratification passage strongly persuasive evidence congressional reach today. reads: 'Every every (including listing exchange) heretofore hereafter performance of, continuance relationship practice (1) regards who, rule, (2) acquired thereunder actual knowledge facts making 78cc(b). Institutional Investor Study Report SEC, H.R.Doc.No. 92—64 (1971), Vol. 4. XVI; 879 seq. XIX; 215 permits V(2)(b); 2520, valid subjected it,' V(1)(a). infra. Requirements affect Extensive annual reports SEC including, inter alia, financial figures, business, assets, increases decreases held. 240.13a—1, 249.310; CCH Fed.Sec.L.Rep. 31,101 (Form 10—K). pro- posed furnish copy holder solicited proxy requests report. Fed.Reg. 3836. Current issuer events occur, evidenced class materially altered another amount ordinary business. 240.13a—11, 249.308; 31,001 8—K). Commission, recognizing Form 10—K annually excessively abstruse holders, 3835, proposed distributed solicitation proxies substantially amounts meaningful information presentedly. These include description issuer, summary explanation revenues expenses, liquidity position working capital requirements identification management issuer's 3834—3838. concedes, ante, 517 'so attenuated' realistic salutary. concession undermines somewhat admonition—itself supported speculation transaction.' Uncertainty 'dicey atmosphere,' supposedly contracts, persist contracts. 'solemn agreement' arbitrate, date, application Northern failed fact, omission 240.10b—5(b), Melrose Park, communications attorney validity territorial See, e.g., 1326, 1334—1339 1972); Travis Anthes Imperial Ltd., 473 515, 523—528 (CA8 1973); Financial Group, Inc., 474 354 (CA9 Schoenbaum First-brook, 405 200 1968); Roth Fund Funds, 279 F.Supp. 934 (SDNY), aff'd, 421 1968). led prepared W. served member delegation conference. 1958 discussed, Israeli delegate pointed could, draft stood, incompatible policy, "the reference lawful policy." 27. difficulty arose "of relate convention." Ibid. Haight continues: 'When proposal put vote, two-thirds majority (13 9) linking Nor corrected Drafting Committee (L. 61), obligation (and is) qualified 'unless performed.' indicated, latitude; offends Apart limited opening, Conference appeared unwilling qualify broad undertaking agreements.' (emphasis added). 'concern' signatories 'not desirability,' 520 contemplated policy. attempts treat minor variation Court, per Chief Burger stated: 'A choice-of-forum contravene brought, declared statute decision.' inescapably Swan clear. Neither abandonment 'laws applicable. Even read 10b—5's standards, victory Pyrrhic. improperly interpret Rule, reviewable prosecute eviscerated lack discovery. underlay instant well. Knickerbocker, Oligopolistic Reaction Multinational Enterprise (Haw.Univ.1973); Vaupel Curhan, World's Enterprises (Harvard Univ.1973). generally Senate Finance, 93d Implications Firms World Trade Investment Labor (Comm.Print Morgan, Controlling Multinationals, Washington Nov. 1973, A15; Diebold, Precarious Path Wall Street Journal, Aug. 6, col.

Category: 7