Answer:
It must have jurisdiction over the person (or company) against whom the suit is brought or over the property involved in the suit.
Internet is open network and has no boundaries. It is spread in many countries. As per traditional jurisdiction Venue is one of the essential requirements of Jurisdiction. Generally, a venue is a place where the crime has been conducted or the party who has filed the case belongs to this place. Now in Internet context Jurisdiction does not fulfil "Venue" requirement. To do so "The Sliding Standard" has been developed.
According to this contract courts identified three types of business contracts
1. Whether the business is of substantial amount and has been done thru sales and contracts
2. Whether all has been done thru using web site.
3. Whether same has been done thru passive advertising. That is people have reached to the web site by themselves.
World's courts are indicating that if minimum contacts requirement is fulfilled then it is enough to compel the defendant to appear in the court while physical presence is not required.
Answer:
If state statute is providing the facility of arbitration to all those cases which are of civil in nature and damages are of less than $50000, then it's a good idea as trial will be fast. There are some issues like will there be some arbitration fee or it will be free. It is not mentioned in the case.
As already there are problems in civil cases that many people do not get access to justice as court fees are high. They are not able to pay and authorities do not give them the exemption in court fee. It is clearly a case of violation of "Right of Access" to the court. Authorities are facing the issue of making the balance between paying court fees and rights of access to the courts. If it happens in this case, then arbitration court could not serve the much purpose other than fast decisions. These will be a type of "Special Arbitrary Courts" for specific types of trial.
But a clause that a party will pay the entire cost of the arbitration if the result in court is improved more than 10% of the decision of arbitration court. This clause seems like a threat or a step to discourage people to not go in court or we can say that people will be discouraged to do appeal in the court. This will be clearly a case of violation of access to the court.
If it is a part of a pilot program then also it will be having the same impact that is violation of rights of access" to the court. During pilot programs the cases which will be dealt with will have the same complaints. Yes, reaction of the people can be taken in this regard.
Answer:
She can bring the case in Florida state court as well in Federal court. Company has head quarter in Georgia but the company has dealings in Florida also. Therefore, if company qualifies the minimum contact test then Florida court can exercise the jurisdiction over the company. She can file case in federal court as well. Both the conditions are satisfied
1. Plaintiff (Florida) and defendants (Georgia) are of different states.
2. Also the $ amount in controversy is more than $75,000.
There is no answer for this question