2017 ORS 646A.322¹
Remedies
  • arbitration
  • cause of action
  • attorney fees
  • injunctive relief

(1)(a) A party to a retailer agreement that is aggrieved by the conduct of another party to the agreement under ORS 646A.310 (Prohibited conduct by supplier), 646A.312 (Termination, cancellation or nonrenewal of retailer agreement), 646A.314 (New or relocated dealership), 646A.316 (Warranty claims), 646A.318 (Warranty claims) or 646A.320 (Retailer’s improvements to products) may seek arbitration of the issues under ORS 36.600 (Definitions) to 36.740 (Relationship to electronic signatures in Global and National Commerce Act). Unless the parties agree to different arbitration rules, the arbitration must be conducted pursuant to the commercial arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association. If the parties agree, the arbitration is the parties’ only remedy and the findings and conclusions of the arbitrator or panel of arbitrators are binding upon the parties.

(b) The arbitrator or arbitrators may award the prevailing party:

(A) The costs of witness fees and other fees in the case;

(B) Reasonable attorney fees; and

(C) Injunctive relief against unlawful termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or change in competitive circumstances.

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, a retailer has a civil cause of action in circuit court against a supplier for damages sustained by the retailer as a consequence of the supplier’s violation of ORS 646A.310 (Prohibited conduct by supplier), 646A.312 (Termination, cancellation or nonrenewal of retailer agreement), 646A.314 (New or relocated dealership), 646A.316 (Warranty claims), 646A.318 (Warranty claims) or 646A.320 (Retailer’s improvements to products), together with:

(a) The actual costs of the action;

(b) Reasonable attorney fees; and

(c) Injunctive relief against unlawful termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or change in competitive circumstances.

(3) A supplier bears the burden of proving that a retailer’s area of responsibility or trade area does not afford sufficient sales potential to reasonably support the retailer. The supplier’s proof must be in writing.

(4) The remedies set forth in this section are not exclusive and are in addition to any other remedies permitted by law, unless the parties have chosen binding arbitration under subsection (1) of this section. [Formerly 646.459; 2015 c.563 §3]

Law Review Cita­tions

52 WLR 451 (2016)

(formerly 646.315 to 646.375)

Notes of Decisions

Where purchaser fails to provide notice of condi­tion requiring repair, presump­tion does not arise that repair time exceeding 30 business days demonstrates inability of manufacturer to conform vehicle. Pavel v. Winnebago Industries, Inc., 127 Or App 16, 870 P2d 856 (1994)

Repair time exceeding 30 business days as evidence of inability to conform vehicle applies only to presently existing defect. Pavel v. Winnebago Industries, Inc., 127 Or App 16, 870 P2d 856 (1994)

Law Review Cita­tions

19 WLR 329 (1983)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 646A—Trade Regulation, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors646A.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 646A, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano646A.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.