To view this page ensure that Adobe Flash Player version 11.1.0 or greater is installed.

U.S. Court Grants Motion to Compel Made by Parties that Enjoined Arbitration Seated in India By J.P. Duffy, Erica Iverson and Priya Chadha (New York) In Ralph Lauren Corporation v United States Polo Association, Inc., a U.S. federal trial court compelled arbitration at the request of a party that had previously obtained a court injunction in India to stay the same arbitration. The decision is significant for international arbitration practitioners, because it reaffirms the lengths to which parties must go to waive their right to arbitration under U.S. law. UNDERLYING DISPUTE The underlying dispute in Ralph Lauren arose out of longstanding trademark litigation between the Ralph Lauren Corporation (“RLC”) and its subsidiaries on the one hand, and United States Polo Asso- ciation, Inc. (“USPA”), and its subsidiaries on the other hand. The parties had been litigating their trademark issues before a federal court since 1984, and in 2003, decided to execute a settlement agreement that ostensibly resolved their differences. USPA LICENSES ITS MARKS TO AN INDIAN LICENSEE The settlement agreement provided that disputes arising out of or in connection with the agreement would be submitted to arbitration before the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (“ICDR”), with the seat being the principal place of business of the USPA licensee at issue in the dispute. In 2007, USPA and a licensee that had its principal place of busi- ness in Bangalore, India, entered into a license that allowed the licensee to sell apparel with USPA’s marks in India. As part of that transaction, the licensee also agreed to be bound by the terms of the settlement agreement—including the arbitration clause. 57