Non-signatories in Arbitration Proceedings With Focus on a Third Party Beneficiary and Equitable Estoppel Doctrines in the United States

The United States has used legal theoretical constructions such as equitable estoppel and the third party beneficiary under which non-signatories of an arbitration agreement can be bound to the arbitration agreement of others. 1) The third party beneficiary theory has been used when a signatory defendant argues that a non-signatory plaintiff is bound by an arbitration agreement, or a non-signatory defendant argues that a signatory plaintiff is required to arbitrate the plaintiff’s claims against the non-signatory. On the other hand, equitable estoppel has developed as two distinct theories. According to the first theory, if a non-signatory party knowingly accepted the benefits of an agreement, it can be estopped from denying its obligation to arbitrate. The second theory compels a signatory to arbitrate because of the close relationship between the entities involved and the fact that the claims were intimately founded in and intertwined with the underlying contract obligations.