Opinion
No. 2020-CC-01077
11-18-2020
Writ application denied.
Hughes, J., would grant.
Crichton, J., would grant for reasons assigned by Justice Genovese.
Genovese, J., would grant and assigns reasons.
Genovese, J., would grant and assigns reasons. The issue before us in this case is the validity, vel non , of an arbitration clause. Plaintiff and defendant entered into a contractual agreement whereby plaintiff, a construction company, would rebuild certain roofs in the Virgin Islands for defendant, a government contractor, following Hurricanes Irma and Maria. After the work was performed, plaintiff alleged a brief of contract relative to payments received for its work. In response, defendant filed exception of prematurity, citing the arbitration clause. The trial court overruled defendant's exception of prematurity; however, the court of appeal reversed.
In my view, the appellate court erred in mandating arbitration because the arbitration language in the contract was permissive, and the right to implement arbitration was unilateral. The plain language of the contractual provision relative to arbitration provides that at the defendant's option, the dispute may be submitted to arbitration. This unilateral and permissive language in the agreement does not mandate arbitration. I would grant this writ, reverse the court of appeal, and reinstate the trial court's denial of defendant's exception of prematurity.
Crichton, J., would grant for reasons assigned by Justice Genovese.