<div dir="auto"><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">"Has anyone considered binding arbitration as a means to resolve these various
controversies? It seems to me that that might be a more cost efficient,
and almost certainly a more time-efficient manner of resolving a number of
outstanding disputes that various parties have with AFRINIC at present.
Andrew is right, of course, to lament the high costs of traditional legal actions.
But in which instances has AFRINIC initiated those costly legal actions?"</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Um I've argued for Afrinic to commit to arbitration since the inception of the issues. Not sure when you joined team ADR.</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Complaining that you are being sued after you committed a tort is a bit rich. You are sounding like the whining American executives who are unhappy that Ford was slapped with an injunction in Germany after they refused to enter into FRAND licensing negotiations knowing full well that refusing to do so represents intending to infringe on patents.</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap">The party who acts wrongfully and who fails to remedy is responsible for the litigation that follows.</pre></pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Afrinic's board knowingly, maliciously and for an alterior motive moved to cancel a members membership. They did so without following any of the rules of natural justice. </pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">That is the inescapable and dispositive fact of this fiasco. The existence in the RSA of a dispute resolution clause is the best way to guard the organization moving forward and its absence means that even if the board were to grow up and stop delinquency they wouldn't be able to ensure that every dispute is now in arbitration. But that is hardly a reason not to do things correctly moving forward. Of course much of the litigation would become moot if the board would simply acknowledge the patently unlawful conduct it engaged in. <br></pre></div>