Mandatory Arbitration and Class Action Waiver

What it is

The agreement requires that most disputes between users and Teachable be resolved through individual binding arbitration rather than court litigation, and prohibits class action or consolidated proceedings.

Why it matters (compliance & governance perspective)

This provision requires users to pursue claims individually through arbitration, which means disputes cannot be aggregated into class actions. The clause also waives the right to a jury trial for covered disputes. Enforceability of class action waivers may be limited in certain jurisdictions, including California under some consumer protection contexts and EU member states under consumer rights directives.

Consumer impact (what this means for users)

Under this clause, covered disputes between a creator or student and Teachable must proceed through individual arbitration. The agreement prohibits class, consolidated, or representative actions, meaning users cannot join with others to pursue collective claims against the platform.

What you can do

Institutional analysis (Compliance & governance intelligence)

1. REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: This provision engages the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) in the US, which generally supports enforcement of arbitration agreements. It also interacts with California consumer protection law and the EU Unfair Contract Terms Directive, both of which may limit enforceability of mandatory arbitration and class action waivers against consumers. The FTC has signaled interest in scrutinizing arbitration clauses that limit consumer remedies. State AGs in California, New York, and other states have authority to challenge such provisions under state consumer protection statutes. 2. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. Mandatory individual arbitration clauses are common in US platform agreements but face meaningful enforceability questions in EU and UK consumer contexts. The class action waiver is the higher-exposure element, as California courts and some federal circuits have carved out exceptions for certain consumer claims. 3. JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU and UK users may retain litigation and collective redress rights under applicable consumer protection law regardless of this clause. California residents may have additional protections under CLRA and other state statutes. Illinois, New York, and other states with active consumer protection enforcement also create heightened exposure. 4. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Institutional buyers contracting for Teachable enterprise services should evaluate whether this arbitration clause applies to B2B agreements or only consumer-facing terms, and whether their own standard terms supersede or conflict with this provision. Indemnification and liability cap provisions in the same agreement interact with this clause by limiting both the forum and the recoverable amount. 5. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should assess whether the arbitration opt-out mechanism is clearly disclosed and accessible, particularly for EU and UK users where mandatory arbitration for consumers may be unenforceable. Compliance programs should document which user categories are subject to this clause and whether local law overrides apply.

Applicable agencies

Provision details

Other risks in this policy

• Creator Content License Grant medium
• Creator Indemnification Obligation medium
• Limitation of Liability medium
• Account Suspension and Termination medium
• Creator Tax Responsibility medium
• Acceptable Use Policy and Prohibited Content medium

Related Analysis

• Coinbase Requires Mandatory Arbitration. You Have 30 Days to Opt Out.

  Coinbase's User Agreement includes a mandatory arbitration clause that most users may not have reviewed. Here is what the clause states and how the opt-out process works.