Class Action Claims Condé Nast Fails to Honor Subscriber Arbitration Agreements, Traps Disputers in ‘Legal Limbo’

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action lawsuit alleges that Condé Nast has knowingly failed to honor its agreements to arbitrate disputes in order to prevent consumers from proceeding with claims against it.

Get the latest open class action lawsuits sent to your inbox. Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter.

The 23-page lawsuit explains that Advance Magazine Publishers Inc., which does business as Condé Nast, requires every consumer who subscribes to its magazines or websites to agree to an arbitration clause included in its terms and conditions. Per the case, the arbitration agreement waives a subscriber’s right to a jury trial and requires them to bring any formal disputes before the American Arbitration Association (AAA).

However, the class action suit claims that Condé Nast deliberately did not register its terms with the AAA, as required by the organization. This allows the media company—whose iconic brands include Glamour, GQ, The New Yorker, Vanity Fair and Vogue—to bind subscribers to arbitration while retaining the ability to “sabotage” any dispute proceedings by refusing to comply with the AAA’s rules, the complaint contends.

“Condé Nast’s systematic and bad faith failure to honor its own agreements to arbitrate is designed to put individuals in legal limbo and prevent them from proceeding with claims against Condé Nast,” the filing argues.

The plaintiffs, two magazine subscribers among a group of individuals who sought to bring claims against Condé Nast, say they initiated arbitration in accordance with the company’s terms by sending through counsel a notice of dispute letter in April 2024. Instead of honoring its arbitration clause as the plaintiffs expected, the defendant “completely ignored” the letter and all subsequent attempts at outreach, the suit charges.

The AAA, after receiving the plaintiffs’ and others’ demands for arbitration in June of that year, then sent a letter to Condé Nast requesting that it register its arbitration clause, the case relays. However, the complaint asserts that the company ignored the AAA’s letter and once again failed to register its arbitration clause.

The lawsuit against Condé Nast shares that as a result of the defendant’s refusal to comply with the AAA’s rules, the plaintiffs and other subscribers have been unable to proceed in arbitration.

As the filing tells it, the company’s practices have created a “deceptive and illusory ‘dispute resolution’ system” whereby consumers are made to engage in a “farcical” arbitration process with no actual means of proceeding with their claims.

“While it sends consumers chasing rainbows, Condé Nast reserves to itself the option to unilaterally force any consumer to arbitrate by eventually registering its arbitration clause and paying related fees,” the case adds.

The suit looks to represent anyone in the United States whose arbitration with Condé Nast did not proceed as a result of the company’s failure to register its arbitration clause with the AAA or otherwise comply with the AAA’s rules and the defendant’s own terms.

Check out ClassAction.org’s lawsuit list for current class action lawsuits and investigations.