[CCWG-ACCT] Legal counsel engagement enhancements

[Greg Shatan]

Lawyers are not fungible. They have different skill sets. We have selected
these firms both for the breadth and depth of their skills and when we need
that breadth on the call we should have it.  The fact that you can't see a
reason for it doesn't mean there's no reason for it.

Greg

On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl>
wrote:

> Léon, Mathieu,
>
> You can¹t be serious. I see no reason whatsoever why we would need 2
> lawyers per firm and so 4 lawyers per call/meeting. These are reputed
> firms and expert lawyers, one of each firm should suffice.
> I really take an issue with the amount of money we¹re spending on legal
> advice
>
> Best,
>
> Roelof
>
>
>
>
> On 20-06-15 16:35, "accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org on
> behalf of León Felipe Sánchez Ambía"
> <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org on behalf of
> leonfelipe at sanchez.mx> wrote:
>
> >Dear all,
> >
> >Just as a follow up to Mathieu¹s email, I would like to clarify that
> >lawyers maximum attendance per call/meeting is 2 lawyers per firm.
> >
> >
> >Best regards,
> >
> >
> >León
> >
> >> El 20/06/2015, a las 16:24, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>
> >>escribió:
> >>
> >> Dear Colleagues,
> >>
> >> During last week's call, we agreed that the co-chair would engage with
> >>the lawyers in order to optimize interactions between our group and the
> >>independent legal counsel, taking into account the importance of quality
> >>advice as well as the concerns regarding expenses.
> >>
> >> We have met today with Holly and Rosemary and this is to report on the
> >>ways forward we have agreed on :
> >>
> >> * to avoid any misunderstanding on questions, as well as enable a
> >>better assessment of costs, we will refrain from certifying questions
> >>until :
> >>    * a discussion has taken place between lawyers and the colleague
> >>asking the question, either through a regular call or through ad hoc
> >>calls (such ad hoc calls would obviously be transcribed and open)
> >>    * such a discussion has, if need be, produced a clarified version of
> >>the question, an estimate of whether the response would require a lot of
> >>research, and an indication of the potential value of the research for
> >>the group's further deliberations.
> >>
> >> * participation of lawyers to meetings and calls will be limited to a
> >>maximum of 2. As a consequence, lawyers may not always be able to
> >>respond to our questions instantly. In such cases, we will rely on the
> >>above certification process.
> >>
> >> * a "punch list" of issues will be produced avec Buenos Aires and
> >>shared with the group as a project management tool.
> >>
> >> We are convinced these simple steps will be useful to get the best
> >>value out of the outstanding expertise of our cousel.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >> --
> >> *****************************
> >> Mathieu WEILL
> >> AFNIC - directeur général
> >> Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06
> >> mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
> >> Twitter : @mathieuweill
> >> *****************************
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> >> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150621/2c5197ca/attachment.html>