N.C. Gen. Stat. » Chapter 1
NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-569.3 (2026)

When Article applies

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 1 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) This Article governs an agreement to arbitrate made on or after January 1, 2004.

(b) This Article governs an agreement to arbitrate made before January 1, 2004, if all parties to the agreement or to the arbitration proceeding agree in a record that this Article applies.

(c) This Article does not govern arbitrations under Article 1H of Chapter 90 of the General Statutes. (1973, c. 676, s. 1; 2003-345, s. 2; 2007-541, s. 2.)

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2007–2025 · leading case: Bullard v. Tall House Bldg. Co., Inc., 676 S.E.2d 96 (N.C. Ct. App. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bullard v. Tall House Bldg. Co., Inc., 676 S.E.2d 96 (N.C. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-569.3 (2005). Here, the parties have not assigned error to the trial court’s use of the RUAA as the applicable law and both parties have also cited the RUAA as applicable law in various documents, including memorandum of law and briefs to this Court.”
In Re W.W. Jarvis & Sons, 671 S.E.2d 534 (N.C. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 3× “Judges WYNN and STEPHENS concur. 1 . N.C.G.S. § 1-567.2 was repealed in 2003; however, it remains applicable to the instant dispute because the agreement was entered into before 1 January 2004.”
Edwards v. Taylor, 643 S.E.2d 51 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “…§ 1-567.2 remains applicable to the instant dispute because the agreement was entered into before 1 January 2004. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-569.3 (2003).”
D&R Constr. Co. v. Blanchard's Grove Missionary Baptist Church, 667 S.E.2d 305 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 4× “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-569.3 reads, (a) This Article governs an agreement to arbitrate made on or after January 1, 2004.”
Sprake v. Leche, 658 S.E.2d 490 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-569.3 (2005) (stating that the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act applies to agreements to arbitrate entered into after 1 January 2004 or if all of the parties agree that it applies).”
SmartSky Networks, LLC v. DAG Wireless LTD (N.C. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 3× “See N.C.G.S. § 1-569.3 (RUAA “governs an[y] agreement to arbitrate made on or after” 1 January 2004).”
Canteen v. Charlotte Metro Credit Union (N.C. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “See also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-569.3 (2020). “However, before a dispute can be settled [by arbitration], there must first exist a valid agreement to arbitrate.”
Canteen v. Charlotte Metro Credit Union (N.C. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “See also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-569.3 (2020). “However, before a dispute can be settled [by arbitration], there must first exist a valid agreement to arbitrate.”
Griessel v. Temas Eye Ctr., Pc, 678 S.E.2d 773 (N.C. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “" N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1-569.3(a) (2007). Although the arbitration clause in plaintiff's employment contract does not specify waiver of the RUAA, it does seek to have a different statutory scheme—the NCUAA—apply.”
Cacv of Colorado, LLC v. Wells, 666 S.E.2d 217 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-569.3 (2007). [2] The trial court conducted a hearing on 15 October 2007 and noted that "Judge Jolly had a hearing on these issues on August 28th, 2007.”
First Prot. Ins. Co. v. Rike (E.D.N.C. 2023). “§ 1-569.3. “The court shall decide whether an agreement to arbitrate exists or a controversy is subject to an agreement to arbitrate.”
First Prot. Ins. Co. v. Lewis O'Leary (4th Cir. 2025). “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-569.3 (a)–(b). O’Leary does not argue that such an agreement exists here.”
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-569.3(a): 1 case
Griessel v. Temas Eye Ctr., Pc, 678 S.E.2d 773 (N.C. Ct. App. 2009). “" N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1-569.3(a) (2007). Although the arbitration clause in plaintiff's employment contract does not specify waiver of the RUAA, it does seek to have a different statutory scheme—the NCUAA—apply.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.