AcornDomains-News
Staff member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2004
- Posts
- 1,227
- Reaction score
- 0
• Previous Orders to Dismiss and Strike Out Claim have been Set Aside
• Nominet will have to pay their own costs of around £30,000
• Trial date for latter part of 2025
Nominet failed in its attempt to maintain that the claim regarding Subscription Fees brought by a member against it in Cardiff should have been struck out. Despite Nominet fighting aggressively to prevent it, it was ordered this afternoon that the orders previously made without notice that the case should be dismissed were set aside.
That means that the dispute is back on and will be decided at trial, likely to be held in the latter part of this year.
The judge agreed with the member’s lawyer, who argued that the previous orders were incapable of being complied with and so must be set aside.
The member had made this point to Nominet in both May and July, inviting them to agree to ask the court to set aside the orders. Nominet refused to do that and insisted that there be a hearing to decide it. They instructed a barrister from Erskine Chambers to represent them.
As a result, by their own figures, Nominet incurred costs of around £30,000. No order as to costs was made, which means Nominet will have to pay its lawyers for the full costs of opposing the application. That could have been avoided if they had accepted the member’s settlement offers.
Nominet has been saying to members that they are trying to minimise costs. We believe that it should now be clear to members and to the board that Nominet is fighting at every turn, trying to avoid having this important issue decided on its merits by the court. It does not seem to care how much that aggressive approach is going to cost members.
Continue reading...
• Nominet will have to pay their own costs of around £30,000
• Trial date for latter part of 2025
Nominet failed in its attempt to maintain that the claim regarding Subscription Fees brought by a member against it in Cardiff should have been struck out. Despite Nominet fighting aggressively to prevent it, it was ordered this afternoon that the orders previously made without notice that the case should be dismissed were set aside.
That means that the dispute is back on and will be decided at trial, likely to be held in the latter part of this year.
The judge agreed with the member’s lawyer, who argued that the previous orders were incapable of being complied with and so must be set aside.
The member had made this point to Nominet in both May and July, inviting them to agree to ask the court to set aside the orders. Nominet refused to do that and insisted that there be a hearing to decide it. They instructed a barrister from Erskine Chambers to represent them.
As a result, by their own figures, Nominet incurred costs of around £30,000. No order as to costs was made, which means Nominet will have to pay its lawyers for the full costs of opposing the application. That could have been avoided if they had accepted the member’s settlement offers.
Nominet has been saying to members that they are trying to minimise costs. We believe that it should now be clear to members and to the board that Nominet is fighting at every turn, trying to avoid having this important issue decided on its merits by the court. It does not seem to care how much that aggressive approach is going to cost members.
Continue reading...
