AcornDomains-News
Staff member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2004
- Posts
- 1,229
- Reaction score
- 0
Court Orders made in the Central London County Court were changed before they were sealed by the Court. Nominet were responsible for drawing up the written Orders. Jim Davies, the Claimant in the case, is asking for urgent answers as to how this happened.
The official court transcript records that the Judge made the following Orders:
The Orders written up after that read:
Those Orders are different and they are wrong.
The Claim was not dismissed. It was settled by agreement and discontinued.
Nominet had argued in court that there wasn’t a settlement and that the application to dismiss and strike out should proceed. The Judge disagreed and refused to do that.
Settling a claim and striking out a claim are two very different things.
Jim Davies does not believe that this change to the Orders handed down by the Judge is an accident. Particularly given that it resulted in Nominet wrongly obtaining one of the Orders they wanted and then falsely claiming to members that it had succeeded in having the Claim dismissed and struck out.
An Application has been filed at Court today, seeking to set aside the incorrect Orders. It also asks for full disclosure of all documents and communications between Nominet and their lawyers to see what may have happened to explain why the wrong orders were drawn up. There are serious questions that need to be answered.
Continue reading...
The official court transcript records that the Judge made the following Orders:
“(1) the compromise is binding and the claim is discontinued in respect of the claimant’s application;
(2) there will be no order for costs as between the parties”
Nominet’s barrister was asked by the court to draw up the written Orders.
The Orders written up after that read:
“( 1) The Claim be dismissed;
(2) There be no order for costs as between the parties.”
Those Orders are different and they are wrong.
The Claim was not dismissed. It was settled by agreement and discontinued.
Nominet had argued in court that there wasn’t a settlement and that the application to dismiss and strike out should proceed. The Judge disagreed and refused to do that.
Settling a claim and striking out a claim are two very different things.
Jim Davies does not believe that this change to the Orders handed down by the Judge is an accident. Particularly given that it resulted in Nominet wrongly obtaining one of the Orders they wanted and then falsely claiming to members that it had succeeded in having the Claim dismissed and struck out.
An Application has been filed at Court today, seeking to set aside the incorrect Orders. It also asks for full disclosure of all documents and communications between Nominet and their lawyers to see what may have happened to explain why the wrong orders were drawn up. There are serious questions that need to be answered.
Nominet’s independent non-executive directors have the power to require the company to provide them with these documents. We believe they should do so, in order to try to avoid futher wasted legal costs and court time.
Continue reading...