[WP1] Thanks, next work steps (pls read)

[Greg Shatan]

Malcolm,

That's not at all what we have been advised.  I think you may be conflating
several pieces of advice:

1.  Only legal persons (i.e., people and legal entities) have the ability
to bring suit.
2.  Members need to be legal persons.
3.  Members are legally able to bring suit to enforce the community powers
we seek to put in the bylaws relating to new/amended bylaws,
budget/strategic plans, and recall of some/all board members if these are
disregarded by the Board.

None of these are related to the issue at hand: what options are available
to a party seeking to enforce a binding arbitration award secured in an IRP?

This is actually a fairly straightforward question, as long as such party
is a legal person.  A random check of recent IRPs reveals that all of the
parties were legal entities.  Litigation to enforce an arbitration result
is a generally recognized cause of action, and I am confident that we have
been advised that it would be available to parties prevailing in an IRP.
Furthermore, I believe that our intention was to ensure that a binding IRP
would meet whatever (fairly basic) criteria there are to qualify as an
arbitration for purposes of such causes of action.

If the party is not a legal person, such as a SO/AC or subpart thereof,
then the party would not be able to bring suit (of course, this could be
solved by having UAs or other legal entities, but that's another
discussion).

Greg


On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 6:09 PM, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm at linx.net> wrote:

>
>
> On 16 Jun 2015, at 19:15, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The party who won the IRP.
>
>
> How would the enforce the IRP decision. We've been advised that they don't
> have standing in court to commence enforcement proceedings, only members do.
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, June 16, 2015, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm at linx.net> wrote:
>
>> But if the Board chooses to disregard the IRP, who will enforce it if the
>> SOACs are disinclined to do so?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On 16 Jun 2015, at 18:35, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > If the IRP is binding, the Board has no discretion to disregard it,
>> even if the community attempts to instruct it to do so (and even if the
>> community can wield "legal persons" in this attempt).
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp1/attachments/20150617/4c3484dc/attachment.html>