[CCWG-ACCT] FW: Continued Counsel Dialogue

[Chris Disspain]

No Avri. At the end of the day it rests with the court as I believe is clear from the note from JD. 

After a finding by an arbitration panel that a bylaw has been breached, it is a matter for the Board about how they remedy (as I believe is the case with the member model also) and that remedy is itself subject to a claim that it breaches a bylaw (if the community has consensus). If the Board refuses to abide by the ruling then a court can order them to do so.

Have I misunderstood the way the member model works. I believe Becky has said numerous times that the only finding could be that the relevant bylaw has been breached, NOT that the Board must take a specific action. Is that wrong?


Cheers,

Chris

> On 2 Oct 2015, at 20:46 , Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> That was one of my favorite lines as well.
> 
> And is a key point.  In the current model, and as far as I can tell in
> the MEM, at the end of the day, all always rests "within the Board's
> discretion."
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> On 02-Oct-15 05:29, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
>> I really LOVE this one:
>> 
>> 	[...]
>> 	"the Board is required to remedy that violation, within the
>> 	Board’s discretion."
>> 	[...]
>> 
>> 	(last line on Page 1)
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151002/9dfb938e/attachment.html>