[CCWG-ACCT] TR: CCWG - proposed legal cost control mechanisms

[Nigel Roberts]

I love the way you keep calling them 'chattering organisations'.
A truly accurate description.



On 11/07/16 11:03, Arasteh wrote:
> Dear Mathieu,
> Dear All
> I fully agree with the course of actions that you proposed
> As for the member/ participants from CCWG,I suggest either 5 Members
> from 5 ICANN geographical region or 5 members from 5 chattering
> organisations
> Regards
> Kavouss
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 11 Jul 2016, at 08:47, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
> <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>> wrote:
>
>> Thank you Bernie, I am expanding the recipient list to the leadership.
>>
>> My comments on the summary, which should form the basis of a set of
>> slides for tomorrow’s meeting
>>
>> In this context the CCWG is proposing the following CCWG WS2
>> Procurement Process for Independent Legal Counsel:
>>
>> •             Establish a legal committee to filter, analyze and
>> approve requests from the CCWG-Accountability WS2 to use independent
>> legal counsel – this committee would be composed of the CCWG Co-Chairs
>> with the participation of a representative of ICANN legal.
>>
>> ðYes to legal committee. I have a different view of composition. I
>> would say co chairs + 3-5 CCWG members or participants (same as
>> previous legal committee). Icann Legal is a provider to this group and
>> should participate but not be a “member”. Sidley and Adler should have
>> the same status.
>>
>> ðBenefits of the committee : ensure clarity of requests + determine
>> which legal group is best suited to respond.
>>
>> ðRapporteurs of the groups presenting requests would also be invited
>> to attend
>>
>> •             All legal requests from WS2 sub-groups would have to be
>> properly framed clearly indicating what the question is and why legal
>> advice is being required before being submitted to the CCWG Legal
>> Committee.
>>
>> ðShould also mention that “independent legal counsel is engaged only
>> when a legal issue is raised and a specific answer is required to a
>> tight and specific legal question,”
>>
>> ðRequests would be shared on the Legal Committee list **before**
>> meetings so that lawyers can prepare clarifying questions and estimates.
>>
>> •             The CCWG Legal Committee would review all such properly
>> formulated requests on a regular basis to determine their admissibility.
>>
>> •             If the request is admissible the CCWG Legal Committee
>> would inquire if ICANN Legal could provide an answer to the request.
>> If ICANN legal can provide the answer the CCWG Legal Committee will
>> request that ICANN legal do so.
>>
>> ðI tried to express my concerns with that “first right of refusal”
>> approach during the call with Icann Legal. I believe it should be the
>> CCWG Legal Committee role to determine which firm it would go to,
>> based on the firms skills, costs and the requirement for “independent”
>> advice.
>>
>> •             If ICANN legal cannot provide the answer, or the answer
>> provided by ICANN legal is judged insufficient by the requester, the
>> CCWG Legal Committee will identify the best external legal resources
>> for this type of work and request a submission for this. If the CCWG
>> Legal Committee deems a submission reasonable for the work requested,
>> it can authorize the selected contractor to proceed with the work with
>> the PCST handling the administration of the request for the CCWG.
>>
>> ðSee above.
>>
>> I welcome any other thoughts.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Mathieu
>>
>> *De :*Bernard Turcotte [mailto:turcotte.bernard at gmail.com]
>> *Envoyé :* dimanche 10 juillet 2016 21:35
>> *À :* Thomas Rickert; Mathieu Weill; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía
>> *Objet :* CCWG - proposed legal cost control mechanisms
>>
>> All,
>>
>> We know we have to get this done so here is the first formal shot at
>> this as following on from our call with Sam this week and then further
>> discussions I had with Thomas on this topic.
>>
>> Please have a look and provide your comments ASAP.
>>
>> The idea would be the run this by Sam on Monday if we can get
>> agreement and then external lawyers and then wrap it up prior to the
>> end of the month which is our deadline.
>>
>> Cheers.
>>
>> B.
>>
>> <CCWG-WS2 Procurement Process for Independent Legal CounselV1.0BT.docx>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> <mailto: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
>