The Council of Hungarian Internet Providers (ISzT or Association), the association responsible for regulating the .hu ccTLD, ensures that all parties concerned have the right to lodge a complaint. Complaints are handled through the Integrated Complaint Handling System.
There are basically two types of complaint:
- A dispute resolution type complaint is when a dispute arises during the registration or use of a domain name. A dispute typically concerns whether a domain applicant or registrant is entitled to apply for or use a particular domain name. In this case, a concerned party can turn to the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum, which, as its name suggests, is an out-of-court dispute resolution forum. Of course, it is also possible for the Complainant to go straight to court, but this is not conditional on recourse to the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum, nor does recourse to the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum preclude recourse to court at a later stage. For more details, see below.
- The ISzT also provides the possibility to submit and handle ‘simple’ complaints, that we call claims. These are, for example, claims where a registrant is dissatisfied with his registrar, or the Registry, or the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum. These complaints are not dealt with by the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum. Claims will be received, investigated and responded to by the ISzT association through this interface of the Integrated Complaint Handling System.
The rules for the settlement of disputes and complaints are set out in the Rules of Procedure of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum (available in Hungarian only). Please find the key points below.
Alternative dispute resolution
The Association also allows for the alternative, out-of-court settlement of disputes related to certain domains (in particular their application, registration, use), which is provided by the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum (ADRF).
Of course, any disputes over domain name application and use can be taken to court, but a simpler and faster solution is to use the procedures of the decision maker of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum. By submitting an application for domain registration and maintaining the registration, the registrant submits to the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum.
The Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum is an organisation operating within the framework of the Association, which acts in the course of its alternative dispute resolution service in disputes relating to individual domains in accordance with the Domain Registration Policy, the Dispute Resolution Rules of Procedure, the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum’s Rules of Procedure, and the specific substantive and procedural rules, in the framework of procedures of Domain and Registration decision maker.
In dispute resolution proceedings, decisions are made by arbitrators independent of the Association, the Registry, and the Registrars. The selection of the arbitrators shall be made through an annual open call for applications.
As of 01.01.2023, a Legal Advisory Committee will assist the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum in its predictable, high-quality operation, composed of professionals with significant theoretical and practical experience in domain disputes. In particular, the Committee’s tasks include issuing opinions in principle, which were previously the responsibility of the Advisory Committee, participating in the selection of arbitrators and providing professional support for their work. The members of the Legal Advisory Committee are: Dr Gergely Jambrik and György Pintz.
The Integrated Complaint Handling System (EPR) and other IT systems of the Association ensure the full handling of domain name and procedure of the registration decision maker arising in the context of alternative dispute resolution.
Complaints against the Registry, any Registrar, and the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum may also be submitted through the Integrated Complaint Handling System, the rules for the handling of which are set out in the Rules of Procedure of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum.
Cases of alternative dispute resolution
1. Procedure of the Domain Decision Maker
A procedure of the domain decision maker can be initiated in the following cases:
- For complaints against the delegation of conditional use domains that have not yet been delegated.
- In the event that the application of the Domain Applicant is rejected by the Registry.
2. Procedure of the Registration Decision Maker
After the registration of a domain name, the revocation or transfer of the domain name from the complained Domain Registrant may be initiated by initiating the procedure of the registration decision maker by the person who has the right to use the name.
3. Hotline Decision Making Forum
The Internet Hotline of the National Communications and Media Authority (NMHH) can be contacted about infringing content published under delegated domains.
If this procedure is unsuccessful, the Internet Hotline can go to the Hotline Decision Making Forum (HDF), the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum, and request the suspension and blocking of the domain concerned (under which the infringing content was published).
The Hotline Decision Making Forum can therefore only be contacted by the Internet Hotline.
The Registry and the Registrars implement the resolutions and decisions of the various bodies of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum. Except in the case of intentional wrongdoing, neither the legal entity maintaining the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum, nor the persons acting within the framework of the procedure of the Registration Decision Maker, nor the Registry nor the Registrar shall be liable for acting within the framework of the Domain Registration Policy or the Dispute Resolution Rules of Procedure or for refusing to act.
The language of the procedures
The language of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Forum is Hungarian, and submissions to the proceedings by any party can only be made in Hungarian.
If an annex is in a foreign language, a simple translation must also be attached – failure to do so may result in the evidence being disregarded.
Members of the Legal Advisory Committee
Dr. Jambrik Gergely
List of decision-makers
Dr. Bajorfi Ákos
Dr. Berecz Sándor
Dr. Bozzay Gyöngyi
Dr. Brandusa Mónika
Dr. Csányi Balázs
Dr. Halász Bálint
Dr. Havas Sághy Gábor
Dr. Horváth Ágota
Dr. Kapás Lilla
Dr. Krajnyák András
Dr. László Áron Márk
Dr. Lendvai Zsófia
Dr. Mező Barnabás
Dr. Muraközi Gergely
Dr. Nagy Zsuzsanna
Dr. Nemessányi Zoltán
Dr. Tóth Krisztina
Dr. Varga Péter
Dr. Vermes Attila
Dr. Zsitek István