ireland.co.uk DRS appeal

[Whois-SearchWhois-Search is verified member.]

Worth a read:

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/26104_ireland_appeal.pdf

 

[PredPred is verified member.]

cheers, pretty interesting. read first couple pages then scanned.
so , was a breach of contract not drs at all & they dismissed?
quite right so if case, they would need to pursue in the claims courts surely?
not sure how it works, Brit law and US law are diferent. he shouldn't have backed out of a deal though and he approached them to remind them. bit of a mug the bloke obviously. why agree to deal THEN do his homework? Fool

Incidentally, when a case like this is brought, how much would this have cost the complainant?
Also, had they won, how much would drs have charged the respondant ?
cheers

 

[fred]

Incidentally, when a case like this is brought, how much would this have cost the complainant?

£750 + VAT for the initial DRS
£3000 + VAT for the appeal
plus any associated costs for any legal advice etc they may have sourced.

Also, had they won, how much would drs have charged the respondant ?
cheers

Nothing

 

[PredPred is verified member.]

cheers Fred

 

[sneezycheese]

An interesting read that raises some interesting questions...

Had Nominet contemplated that pure, possibly complex, contractual disputes would fall to be resolved under the Policy, its system for selecting and appointing Experts to cases would have been very different and the procedure for dealing with the disputes more comprehensive than the simple paper-based system it is.

...so does this now open the door for an aplication for Judicial Review against Nominet? :twisted:

DRS 1863 (<longlife.co.uk>) – this case is perhaps the closest to the case in hand. The domain name was descriptive/generic and the complainant had no rights apart from those arising from the purchase contract. However, the vendor respondent had pocketed the purchase price paid by the complainant, and did not contest the proceedings (and therefore did not contest the effect of the purchase contract).

...odd - doesn't this exactly highlight one of the key issues with the DRS, ie; very similar contractual issues, but in one because the Respondant doesn't reply to the complaint it looks like you get some form of 'Default Transfer' and in the latter the 'experts' decide:

For all the above reasons, the Panel is confident that pure contractual disputes of this kind are outwith the scope of the Policy.

All very odd if you ask me. :???:

Regards,

Sneezy.

 

[nnh]

Read old thread too...

http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/domain-name-disputes/22088-ireland-co-uk-bella-co-uk-roadrunner-co-uk.html

 

[retired_member12]

If this seller had gone on to complete the paperwork, and then submitted it to Nominet, then in much the same way that Nominet appear to state that contractual matters are beyond its remit, if the seller subsequently tried to then pursuade Nominet not to complete the transfer, then whether the Escrow payment had gone through or not, Nominet would not be in a legal position to prevent the transfer, as it was not a party to this contract.