If you have a legal dispute with Yelp, you generally must resolve it through private arbitration rather than going to court, and you cannot join a class action lawsuit against Yelp.
This analysis describes what Yelp's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
Arbitration is a private process that typically limits discovery and appeal rights compared to court, and the class action waiver means users cannot pool claims with others even if many people are affected by the same issue.
Previous version had no excerpt content; current version now includes explicit disclosure language referencing Section 13 and defining the scope of mandatory individual arbitration.
View full change record →This provision removes your right to sue Yelp in court for most disputes and prevents you from joining any group lawsuit, meaning individual claims that may be small in value have limited practical recourse outside of the arbitration process.
How other platforms handle this
THESE TERMS REQUIRE THE USE OF ARBITRATION (SECTION 12.2) ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS TO RESOLVE DISPUTES, RATHER THAN JURY TRIALS OR CLASS ACTIONS, AND ALSO LIMIT THE REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO YOU IN THE EVENT OF A DISPUTE.
Any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach, termination, enforcement, interpretation or validity thereof, including the determination of the scope or applicability of this agreement to arbitrate, shall be determined by arbitration before one arbitrat...
You and Teachable agree to resolve any disputes through final and binding arbitration, except as set forth under Exceptions to Agreement to Arbitrate below. You also agree that disputes will only be resolved on an individual basis and not as a class, consolidated, or representative action.
Monitoring
Yelp has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"PLEASE NOTE: THESE TERMS INCLUDE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROVISIONS (SEE SECTION 13) THAT, WITH LIMITED EXCEPTIONS, REQUIRE THAT (1) CLAIMS YOU BRING AGAINST YELP BE RESOLVED BY BINDING, INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATION, AND (2) YOU WAIVE YOUR RIGHT TO BRING OR PARTICIPATE IN ANY CLASS, GROUP, OR REPRESENTATIVE ACTION OR PROCEEDING.— Excerpt from Yelp's Yelp Terms of Service
REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Mandatory arbitration clauses and class action waivers in consumer contracts are scrutinized under the FTC Act and have been subject to ongoing regulatory and legislative attention in the US. For EEA and UK users, mandatory arbitration clauses in consumer contracts may be unenforceable under EU Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair contract terms and equivalent UK consumer protection legislation, regardless of what the agreement asserts. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has separately addressed arbitration in financial services contexts, though Yelp is not a financial services provider. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The clause asserts broad arbitration coverage with limited exceptions and a class action waiver. While this structure is common among US technology platforms, it creates material exposure if enforced against EEA or UK consumers, where mandatory local consumer law may override such provisions. California courts have also scrutinized arbitration clause enforceability in certain contexts. JURISDICTION FLAGS: EEA and UK users present the highest enforceability risk for this clause. California users may have additional state-law protections. The terms apply different arbitration rules depending on the claim amount, which creates operational complexity for compliance tracking across geographies. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Business accounts that are legal entities rather than consumers may have a different enforceability posture for arbitration clauses. The opt-out mechanism (30-day email window) must be operationally maintained and documented to be credibly asserted as meaningful consent to arbitration. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should confirm the arbitration opt-out email process is functional and that opt-out records are retained. The geographic scope of arbitration enforcement should be reviewed against EEA and UK user populations. Any updates to the arbitration clause should trigger fresh opt-out windows and user notification per the Terms' change notification provisions.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
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.
561 arbitration provisions across 197 platforms. ConductAtlas tracks how dispute resolution is being restructured across the internet.
Compliance Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
Arbitration is a private process that typically limits discovery and appeal rights compared to court, and the class action waiver means users cannot pool claims with others even if many people are affected by the same issue.
This provision removes your right to sue Yelp in court for most disputes and prevents you from joining any group lawsuit, meaning individual claims that may be small in value have limited practical recourse outside of the arbitration process.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 20 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Yelp.