Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
On 5 April 2005, David King, the undersigned, ("the Expert") confirmed to Nominet that he knew of no reason why he could not properly accept the invitation to act as expert in this case and further confirmed that he knew of no matters which ought to be brought to the attention of the parties, which might appear to call into question his independence and/or impartiality.
The Expert confirms that he has perused the Exhibits to the Complaint supplied by the Complainant with the hard copy of the Complaint.
The Expert confirms that he has perused the Exhibits to the Response supplied by the Respondent with the hard copy of the Response.
The Complainant's reply to the Respondent's Response can be summarised as follows:
The Complaint lodged is to the registration of the Domain Name by the Respondent and the Complainant fails to see why the Respondent objects to the Complainant rather than the Complaint.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.