PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO .eu ADR RULES AND SUPPLEMENTAL RULES
12 November 2009
The Czech Arbitration Court invites comments from interested parties to the proposed amendments to both the .eu ADR Rules and Supplemental Rules. The amendments seek (i) to implement few practical changes related to the so called “language trial” procedure which follow experiences and recommendations of a number of commentators and were discussed at the last Panellist meeting; and (ii) to abolish the requirement for the Parties to submit their Complaints and/or Responses also in a hardcopy. The CAC has conducted a number of enquiries on this topic during this year and also following ICANN’s recent amendments to the UDRP Rules in the same direction we believe it is time to discuss and introduce the abolishment of the “hardcopy duty” so that the Parties are able to communicate throughout the whole .eu ADR process by their preferred form of communication, including in electronic form only via the CAC’s on-line platform. The proposed amendments are provided below:
Proposed changes to ADR Supplemental Rules
Comments on these proposals are encouraged to be submitted by 12 December 2009 via email to tereza.bartoskova@adr.eu. All comments received will be publicly posted at http://udrp.adr.eu.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO CAC´s UDRP SUPPLEMENTAL RULES
11 November 2009
The Czech Arbitration Court has prepared a proposal for a new process within UDRP. Please find attached proposed amendments of our UDRP Supplemental Rules which we submit for the purposes of public consultation.
The so called Expedited Decision process as proposed is a simple and straightforward procedure. It will be for a substantially lower filing fee where the Complainant elects to file substantially shorter complaint (prescribed maximum word limit will be substantially lower than for normal complaints) and no response is filed. Decisions will be made by usual UDRP panellists in a short-form UDRP decision (which will still contain principal arguments) using the same standard of assessment as in other UDRP cases in accordance with the Policy. The Panel will have discretion to reject the Expedited Decision path if it would be unfair to decide in this shorter way (including if there is a suspicion of gaming on the part of the Complainant). If the Panel concludes that the more appropriate route for the dispute would be by a normal UDRP decision and not by the Expedited Decision, the Complainant will have to pay-up full UDRP filing fee.
Proposed changes to CAC´s UDRP Supplemental Rules
Comments on this proposal are encouraged to be submitted by 11 December 2009 via email to tereza.bartoskova@adr.eu. All comments received will be publicly posted at http://udrp.adr.eu.