<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:36.0pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:36.0pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;
color:black;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:401369797;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1002807740 134807553 134807555 134807557 134807553 134807555 134807557 134807553 134807555 134807557;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:488523693;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:161373440 134807553 134807555 134807557 134807553 134807555 134807557 134807553 134807555 134807557;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l2
{mso-list-id:718940157;
mso-list-template-ids:-1171472004;}
@list l2:level1
{mso-level-start-at:4;
mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l3
{mso-list-id:894200804;
mso-list-template-ids:-1012206538;}
@list l4
{mso-list-id:1005206439;
mso-list-template-ids:1841978832;}
@list l4:level1
{mso-level-start-at:3;
mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5
{mso-list-id:1441804464;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:1362251792 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l5:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l5:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l5:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l6
{mso-list-id:1762140098;
mso-list-template-ids:85592138;}
@list l6:level1
{mso-level-start-at:2;
mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-GB" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Hi David<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Thank you for sharing your thoughtful review of the timing issue.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">All, I hope you will have had to time to review and consider David’s views before our meeting later today. Whilst I know that there are
some differences of opinion on some of this, this gives a helpful starting point for us in picking the discussion back up. In particular, as David reminds us, there are two main prongs to the timing issue, which I will take the liberty of restating:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Prong 1<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">The time within which a Claim must be filed after a Claimant becomes aware or reasonably should have become aware of the action or inaction
giving rise to the Dispute – this is the Bylaws language and something we are specifically tasked with addressing in the Rules:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0cm" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="color:black;margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo7">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;background:white">Following second public comment, there is substantial support for this being 120 days (extended from 45 days)<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="color:black;margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo7">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;background:white">Some concerns raised on the last call that 120 days might not be sufficient at least for a Claim brought by the empowered community<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="color:black;margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo7">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;background:white">Should the proposed 120 days be tolled to account for other accountability mechanisms and if so which?
<o:p></o:p></span></li><ul style="margin-top:0cm" type="circle">
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="color:black;margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo7">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;background:white">Whilst the timing rules were different under the previous Bylaws, the (out of date) guidelines relating to the Cooperative Engagement Process (CEP),
which is an expected pre-step to commencing an IRP, did allow for tolling at least in respect of that process.
<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="color:black;margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo7">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;background:white">Other mechanisms to be considered may include the Request for Reconsideration, an Ombuds review, and requests under the Documentary Information Disclosure
Policy. <o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="color:black;margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo7">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;background:white">I would also like to flag the proposed appeals process being developed for the SubPro recommendations for future new gTLD rounds, since the impact of
this on the timing of an IRP was specifically raised on a recent SubPro WG call.<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">Prong 2<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Whether there should be an overall cut off to the time within which a claim can be filed (the repose), such that if a potential Claimant
had not yet </span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#333333;background:white">suffered “an injury or harm that is directly and causally connected to the alleged violation”, and so was not yet eligible to be an actual Claimant
under an IRP,</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"> or had not yet become aware/reasonably ought to have become aware of the action/inaction in question then they would be time barred.
If so, how long:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0cm" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="color:black;margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo8">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Many of the comments in the
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">second public comment supported the removal of the repose altogether</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="color:black;margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo8">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">Some, particularly RySG and Verisign supported some repose, but longer than 12 months. 24 or 36 months suggested. Org also supports there
being a repose.</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="color:black;margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo8">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">IPC favored removal of the repose, but if there is to be one then it should be longer than 12 months and should run from when the party
is actually harmed (as opposed to the date of the action/inaction).</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="color:black;margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo8">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">As with Prong 1, should there be tolling for other mechanisms within Prong 2 and if so which</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">In considering Prong 2, we must consider whether this is permissible under the relevant section of the Bylaws, and indeed whether the intent
of the IRP and principles such as fundamental fairness and due process positively support having some repose.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">I look forward to discussing further with those who are able to make today’s call.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Susan<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Susan Payne<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Head of Legal Policy<b><br>
Com Laude | Valideus</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">D: +44 20 7421 8255<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">M: +44 7971 661175<br>
E: <a href="mailto:susan.payne@comlaude.com"><span style="color:#0563C1">susan.payne@comlaude.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"> IOT <iot-bounces@icann.org>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>McAuley, David via IOT<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 02 November 2020 17:12<br>
<b>To:</b> iot@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [IOT] Thoughts on Rule 4 Time for Filing<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Hello IOT colleagues,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Prior to the IOT reconstitution I had taken a position (in my personal capacity) in favor of an overall time limitation for filing IRP claims.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Recently I took a new look at the issue – and on our call on October 6<sup>th</sup> said I would post my personal thoughts on the list. Here they are.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I remain in support of an overall time limitation – although 24 months may be more suitable than 12 months. I could support either. Here is my reasoning. Note that all portions marked in yellow below are emphasis added
by me. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">Bylaw 4.3:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Section 4.3(n)(iv)(A) states “<span style="color:black;background:white">(iv) The Rules of Procedure are intended
<span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">to ensure fundamental fairness and due process
</span>and <span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">shall at a minimum</span> address the following elements: (A)</span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black;background:white">The time within which a Claim must be filed after a Claimant becomes aware or reasonably should have become aware of the action or inaction giving rise to the Dispute</span><span lang="EN-US">”.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The phrase “<span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">at a minimum</span>” means something, and I don’t believe that this bylaw provision precludes us from imposing a reasonable overall time limitation
<u>in addition</u> to establishing the time to file once the claimant is, or should be, aware of the action/inaction by ICANN.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Note also that the bylaws in effect prior to the IANA Transition had this
<a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/bylaws-2016-02-16-en#IV">provision</a> (at Article IV, Section 3.3) :<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black;background:white">A request for
<span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">independent review must be filed within thirty days of the posting of the minutes</span> of the Board meeting (and the accompanying Board Briefing Materials, if available) that the requesting party contends
demonstrates that </span><span lang="EN-US">ICANN<span style="color:black;background:white"> violated its Bylaws or Articles of Incorporation. …</span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">So, this notion of an overall time limitation is not new to ICANN IRP. I argue that the language in Bylaw Section 4.3(n)(iv)(A) is not preclusive of an overall time limit. If it was meant to be preclusive then the insertion
of the “at a minimum” language would have been contrary to that intent.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">In my view, other provisions of Section 4.3(n) have a bearing here as well:
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US">4.3(n)(i): … [the rules for IRP shall] conform<span style="color:black;background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow"> with international arbitration norms</span><span style="color:black;background:white">
and [be] streamlined, easy to understand <span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">
and apply fairly to all parties</span>. …</span><span style="background:white"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="background:white"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black;background:white">4.3(n)(ii): The Rules of Procedure
<span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">shall be informed by international arbitration norms and consistent with the Purposes of the IRP</span>. </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">These other provisions of Section 4.3(n) appear to establish reasonable guidelines for our work:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="1">
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo3">
<u><span lang="EN-US">Conformance with international arbitration customs/best practices.</span></u><span lang="EN-US"> Arbitrations typically arise in one of two contexts: the parties to a dispute agree ad hoc to arbitration (in which case timing is not an
issue) or a contract term between them (or a law or treaty) establishes arbitration as the method for dispute resolution. All contracts are subject to a body of national law somewhere in the world and most such bodies of law will have a statute of limitations
on bringing civil contract or other actions. By adopting an outside limit on time to file I submit that we would be following customary practice.
<o:p></o:p></span></li></ol>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"><span lang="EN-US" style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="2" type="1">
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo3">
<u><span lang="EN-US">Apply fairly to all parties:</span></u><span lang="EN-US"> ICANN, the only entity guaranteed to be a party in each IRP, is entitled to
<span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">fundamental fairness and due process</span> as well as claimants. <u> </u> <o:p></o:p></span></li></ol>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="3" type="1">
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo3">
<u><span lang="EN-US">Consistent with Purposes of IRP:</span></u><span lang="EN-US"> As you know, there are a number of purposes of IRP specified in Section 4.3(a). Here I want to point to three of them:<u><o:p></o:p></u></span></li></ol>
<p style="margin-left:72.0pt;background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">(vi) R<span style="background:white">educe Disputes by
<span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">creating precedent</span> to guide and inform the Board, Officers …, Staff members, </span>Supporting Organizations<span style="background:white">, </span>Advisory Committees<span style="background:white">,
and the global Internet community in connection with policy development and implementation.</span></span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin-left:72.0pt;background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">(vii) Secure the accessible, transparent, efficient,
<span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">consistent, coherent, and just resolution of Disputes.</span></span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin-left:72.0pt;background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">(viii)
<span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">Lead to binding, final resolutions</span> consistent with international arbitration norms that are enforceable in any court with proper jurisdiction.</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US">As Chris said on the most recent call, reasonable
<span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">certainty</span> is a goal here. And, in my opinion, finality and predictability are two very important elements of certainty in this context. Certainty seems also important to the IRP Purposes of consistency,
coherence, and just resolution of disputes. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US">How tenable will the notion of precedence be if established IRP decisions can be challenged long after development?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="4" type="1">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo3">
<u><span lang="EN-US">Ensure fundamental fairness: </span></u><span lang="EN-US">While I certainly agree that fairness should run to all ‘parties,’ I go further and argue that fundamental fairness in IRPs runs to broader communities. As we saw in Bylaw Section
4.3(a)(vi) above, <span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">the notion of precedent is to inform not only ICANN but also SOs, ACs, and the global Internet community</span>. They rely on a reasonably certain and predictable policy landscape to do
their work and make their decisions. Allowing for stale complaints could unreasonably jeopardize that landscape. <o:p></o:p></span></li></ol>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">My understanding of the argument in opposition of an overall time limitation is that a claimant could be time barred before it ever learns of the alleged harm. If we extend the overall cap to 24 months (or even 36 months)
that should <span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">substantially mitigate</span> this concern while at the same time establishing a fair balance between permitting a claimant to redress harm, and ensuring fairness to ICANN, the community and
to the process itself. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">And finally, since ICANN is governed by California law, statutes of limitations under that body of state law might help to inform the appropriate statute of limitations for lodging an IRP claim. Although there is no one
single statute of limitation for a claim that is perfectly analogous to an IRP, similar provisions under California law reasonably support the conclusion that statutes of limitations vary and do not follow a single approach. In addition, an IRP claim might
also be analogized to a claim under the California Administrative Procedures Act, pursuant to which an aggrieved party may seek recourse through an administrative action against a private party based on its failure to comply with applicable rules and regulations
of the relevant agency. Of note, there is a <span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">
two-year</span> statute of limitations for filing damage complaints with the Public Utilities Commission. (Cal. Pub. Util. Code § 735 (West))<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">When we get to drafting the Time for Filing Rule, I thus urge us to adopt this two-prong approach with the first prong being the days within which to file following becoming aware (or reasonably should have become aware)
of the claim. And the second prong would be an overall time limitation in the nature of a statute of repose that the panel must apply irrespective party action, perhaps tollable for one thing only – the pendency of active CEP.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">This is a challenging issue and I appreciate the good-faith arguments on both sides. These are my thoughts on this important topic.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Thank you and best wishes,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">David <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">David McAuley<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Sr International Policy & Business Development Manager<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Verisign Inc.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">703-948-4154<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<hr>
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the
sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this
email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company
registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30
Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus
USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see
<a href="https://comlaude.com" target="_blank">www.comlaude.com</a>
</body>
</html>