[CCWG-ACCT] A path to Dublin and beyond
Malcolm Hutty
malcolm at linx.net
Fri Oct 9 22:13:40 UTC 2015
On 09/10/2015 22:51, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
>> 6. Mechanism for binding IRP where a panel decision is enforceable in
> any court recognizing international arbitration results — even if
> ICANN’s board refused to participate in the binding arbitration.
> (assuming CCWG lawyers verify this works without activating a
> Membership model)
>>
>
> SO: Will be good to know if this is now confirmed to be Yes or No.
>
Seun,
I am also eagerly awaiting Counsel's response.
Not only was it a significant assertion in Jones Day's memo of 1st
October (second sub-bullet on page 2) and repeated in Jones Day's memo
of Oct 7th ("Fourth,..."), confirmation has been certified as Question
68. See
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52896826
So it won't be forgotten.
I do hope this will be ready before we leave for Dublin, as it really is
a crucial question.
Holly or Rosemary: sorry to press, but any hints on when to expect Q68?
Malcolml
--
Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523
Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog
London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/
London Internet Exchange Ltd
21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY
Company Registered in England No. 3137929
Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list