Associate Attorney
In Nogare v. Uber Technologies, 50 Fla. L. Weekly D1737 (11th Cir. 2025), the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a trial court’s decision to compel arbitration against a plaintiff who had clicked through Uber’s updated terms of service — including an arbitration clause — months before suffering personal injuries during a ride.
The plaintiff filed suit alleging negligence after a 2024 accident in an Uber vehicle. Uber moved to compel arbitration, citing a 2023 update to its terms of use, which included a broad, binding arbitration agreement covering “all claims arising from the use of Uber’s services.”
The plaintiff admitted to accepting the updated terms electronically but argued the clause was unconscionable — claiming she was unaware of what she was signing and that it shouldn’t apply retroactively to injuries already sustained.
The court rejected both arguments.
- First, the court held the arbitration clause was clear and accessible, and that acceptance via click-through constituted valid assent.
- Second, the court found that the agreement expressly applied to past, present, and future claims, including personal injury arising from the use of the app’s services.
- The plaintiff’s argument of surprise or lack of meaningful choice failed because Uber provided notice, and the plaintiff continued using the app.
The decision reflects a growing judicial trend toward strict enforcement of digital arbitration clauses, especially in consumer platforms where terms are updated and acknowledged through online interfaces.
Takeaway: Courts continue to uphold arbitration clauses embedded in click-through terms of service — even when those clauses apply retroactively. If the language is clear, and the user clicks “I agree,” courts will likely enforce it.
At Boatman Ricci, we help clients assess the enforceability of arbitration clauses — whether they’re in employment contracts, service apps, or standard business agreements. Facing a dispute involving online terms or arbitration clauses? Contact our team for guidance on enforceability and defense.
* * * * * * * * * *
THIS BLOG IS INTENDED FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE. THE READER SHOULD CONSULT WITH KNOWLEDGEABLE LEGAL COUNSEL TO DETERMINE HOW APPLICABLE LAWS APPLY TO SPECIFIC FACTS AND SITUATIONS. BLOG POSTS ARE BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT INFORMATION AT THE TIME THEY ARE WRITTEN. SINCE IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE LAWS OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES MAY HAVE CHANGED SINCE PUBLICATION, PLEASE CALL US TO DISCUSS ANY ACTION YOU MAY BE CONSIDERING AS A RESULT OF READING THIS BLOG.