Utah Code » Title 78B, Chapter 11 — Utah Uniform Arbitration Act
Utah Code

Utah Code § 78B-11-107 (2026)

Validity of agreement to arbitrate

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
An agreement contained in a record to submit to arbitration any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable, and irrevocable except upon a ground that exists at law or in equity for the revocation of a contract.
The court shall decide whether an agreement to arbitrate exists or a controversy is subject to an agreement to arbitrate.
An arbitrator shall decide whether a condition precedent to arbitrability has been fulfilled and whether a contract containing a valid agreement to arbitrate is enforceable.
If a party to a judicial proceeding challenges the existence of, or claims that a controversy is not subject to, an agreement to arbitrate, the arbitration proceeding may continue pending final resolution of the issue by the court, unless the court otherwise orders.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 2008–2026 · leading case: Taylor v. Taylor, 2022 UT 35 (Utah 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Taylor v. Taylor, 2022 UT 35 (Utah 2022). · cites it 25× “After the arbitrator issued his decision, David moved the district court to invalidate the award under section 78B-11-107 of the Utah Uniform Arbitration Act, arguing that the arbitration agreement he proposed was invalid because it was contrary to public policy to arbitrate…”
Bybee v. Abdulla, 2008 UT 35 (Utah 2008). · cites it 2× “Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107 (Supp.2008). There is nothing in the Arbitration Act, however, that can be construed to extend its endorsement to future controversies involving strangers to the agreement.”
Mariposa Express, Inc. v. United Shipping Solutions, LLC, 2013 UT App 28 (Utah Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “" Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107(3) (LexisNexis 2012).”
Roberts v. Cent. Refrigerated Serv., 27 F. Supp. 3d 1256 (D. Utah 2014). · cites it 3× “” Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107(1). The court decides whether an agreement to arbitrate exists or whether a controversy is covered by the agreement.”
Georgia Noel Inman v. Matthew G. Grimmer, Individually Jacob R. Davis, Individually Grimmer & Assocs., P.C., a Utah Prof'l Corp. & Grimmer, Davis, Revelli & Ballif, a Utah Prof'l Corp., 2021 WY 55 (Wyo. 2021). · cites it 2× “See Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107 (“(2) The court shall 5 Ms.”
Watson v. EnableUtah (D. Utah 2025). · cites it 6× “The Utah Uniform Arbitration Act, which governs this dispute, provides that “[a]n agreement [to arbitrate] any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable, and irrevocable except upon a ground that exists at law or in…”
Bad Ass Coffee Co. of Hawaii v. Naughty Donkey Enter., LLC, 64 So. 3d 659 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010). “Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107 (1953), a part of the *662 Utah Uniform Arbitration Act, Utah Code Ann.”
Hernandez v. Isotalent (D. Utah 2024). · cites it 3× “(quoting Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107(3)). “Utah law prescribes that the arbitration agreement is severable from the contract as a whole and the court need only determine whether the arbitration provision is enforceable.”
Stuber v. Luckys Auto Credit (D. Utah 2020). · cites it 2× “See Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-129. There is no reason to think the state court would have improperly denied a timely motion to compel arbitration.”
Haston v. Resurgent Capital Servs., L.P. (W.D. Pa. 2022). “2013) (citing Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107(1)); see also Cea v.”
Trainor v. Primary Residential Mortg., Inc. (D.R.I. 2021). “§ 2 ; see also Utah Code § 78B-11-107(1) (“An agreement .”
Ammerman (W.D. Okla. 2026). “Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107(1) (“An [arbitration] agreement .”
— Utah Code § 78B-11-107(1) — 7 cases
Taylor v. Taylor, 2022 UT 35 (Utah 2022). “After the arbitrator issued his decision, David moved the district court to invalidate the award under section 78B-11-107 of the Utah Uniform Arbitration Act, arguing that the arbitration agreement he proposed was invalid because it was contrary to public policy to arbitrate…”
Roberts v. Cent. Refrigerated Serv., 27 F. Supp. 3d 1256 (D. Utah 2014). “” Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107(1). The court decides whether an agreement to arbitrate exists or whether a controversy is covered by the agreement.”
Georgia Noel Inman v. Matthew G. Grimmer, Individually Jacob R. Davis, Individually Grimmer & Assocs., P.C., a Utah Prof'l Corp. & Grimmer, Davis, Revelli & Ballif, a Utah Prof'l Corp., 2021 WY 55 (Wyo. 2021). “See Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107 (“(2) The court shall 5 Ms.”
Haston v. Resurgent Capital Servs., L.P. (W.D. Pa. 2022). “2013) (citing Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107(1)); see also Cea v.”
Trainor v. Primary Residential Mortg., Inc. (D.R.I. 2021). “§ 2 ; see also Utah Code § 78B-11-107(1) (“An agreement .”
— Utah Code § 78B-11-107(2) — 2 cases
Watson v. EnableUtah (D. Utah 2025). “The Utah Uniform Arbitration Act, which governs this dispute, provides that “[a]n agreement [to arbitrate] any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable, and irrevocable except upon a ground that exists at law or in…”
Hernandez v. Isotalent (D. Utah 2024). “(quoting Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107(3)). “Utah law prescribes that the arbitration agreement is severable from the contract as a whole and the court need only determine whether the arbitration provision is enforceable.”
— Utah Code § 78B-11-107(3) — 4 cases
Mariposa Express, Inc. v. United Shipping Solutions, LLC, 2013 UT App 28 (Utah Ct. App. 2013). “" Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107(3) (LexisNexis 2012).”
Roberts v. Cent. Refrigerated Serv., 27 F. Supp. 3d 1256 (D. Utah 2014). “” Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107(1). The court decides whether an agreement to arbitrate exists or whether a controversy is covered by the agreement.”
Hernandez v. Isotalent (D. Utah 2024). “(quoting Utah Code Ann. § 78B-11-107(3)). “Utah law prescribes that the arbitration agreement is severable from the contract as a whole and the court need only determine whether the arbitration provision is enforceable.”
Watson v. EnableUtah (D. Utah 2025). “The Utah Uniform Arbitration Act, which governs this dispute, provides that “[a]n agreement [to arbitrate] any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable, and irrevocable except upon a ground that exists at law or in…”
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.