So being a small claims court case, there is no written opinion.
However, here's the other side to this particular claim.
" the vast majority of Lord's 61 pledges came after the arbitration clause was added and that Lord accepted the new terms of service when he added additional funds to his initial pledge. "
My guess, if he was to appeal, the end result would be a ruling saying "The stuff done before the arbitration clause get adjudicated, the stuff after goes to arbitration"
This is what has happened in the past. But in general, you are allowed to give contracts retroactive effect if both parties agree and it's explicit.
This would probably leave Lord with a claim for basically nothing.
However, here's the other side to this particular claim. " the vast majority of Lord's 61 pledges came after the arbitration clause was added and that Lord accepted the new terms of service when he added additional funds to his initial pledge. "
My guess, if he was to appeal, the end result would be a ruling saying "The stuff done before the arbitration clause get adjudicated, the stuff after goes to arbitration"
This is what has happened in the past. But in general, you are allowed to give contracts retroactive effect if both parties agree and it's explicit.
This would probably leave Lord with a claim for basically nothing.