James Feggestad v. Kerzner International Bahamas Limited, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 22105

James and Karen Feggestad booked a stay at the Atlantis Resort (Bahamas) and received an email reservation confirmation containing a hyperlink to the resort’s Terms and Conditions, which included a Bahamian forum selection clause.
At check-in Mr. Feggestad signed a registration card whose back contained an "Acknowledgement, Agreement and Release" stating Bahamian law and the Supreme Court of The Bahamas as the exclusive venue.
Several days later Mr. Feggestad slipped on a wet sidewalk at the resort and was injured; the Feggestads sued in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida alleging negligence.
Kerzner moved to dismiss based on the forum selection clause (and forum non conveniens); the district court granted dismissal on the basis the clause was valid and enforceable.
On appeal the Feggestads argued (1) they were misled by front-desk staff about the purpose of the signature and (2) they were not meaningfully notified of the clause because it was only in a hyperlink in the confirmation email; they also raised physical-characteristics objections for the first time on appeal.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed, holding the clause was reasonably communicated (by email hyperlink and signed registration card), not procured by fraud or overreaching, and therefore enforceable.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether forum-selection clause was procured by fraud/overreaching	Feggestad: front-desk misrepresented purpose of signature and hurried check-in prevented meaningful review	Kerzner: clause was disclosed twice (email hyperlink and registration card); no evidence staff prevented reading	Held: No fraud/overreaching; signing was binding and clause enforceable
Whether forum-selection clause was reasonably communicated	Feggestad: hyperlink in email and terms were not meaningfully brought to their attention; they never accessed link	Kerzner: email confirmation with hyperlink and the written registration form provided sufficient notice and opportunity to reject	Held: Reasonable communicativeness satisfied; clause valid and dismissal affirmed

Krenkel v. Kerzner Int’l Hotels Ltd., 579 F.3d 1279 (11th Cir. 2009) (forum-selection clauses presumptively valid; test for reasonable communicativeness)
Lipcon v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, 148 F.3d 1285 (11th Cir. 1998) (grounds to invalidate forum-selection clauses)
Aldana v. Del Monte Fresh Produce N.A., 578 F.3d 1283 (11th Cir. 2009) (standard of review for forum non conveniens)
Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235 (1981) (deference to district court’s forum non conveniens balancing)
Starkey v. G Adventures, Inc., 796 F.3d 193 (2d Cir. 2015) (email hyperlink to terms can reasonably communicate forum-selection clause)
Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute, 499 U.S. 585 (1991) (enforceability of forum clauses in consumer contracts)
Access Now, Inc. v. Sw. Airlines Co., 385 F.3d 1324 (11th Cir. 2004) (issues not raised below are forfeited on appeal)