Extent of Screenrights’ adoption of proposed changes to the Competing Claims Resolution Procedures (CCRP), subject to ongoing review and consultation with members
September 2019
| Proposed Change | Extent of Adoption |
|---|---|
| Simplify the resolution procedure by merging the Express Resolution Process (ERP) and the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) into one Competing Claims Resolution Procedure (CCRP). | Adopted in full. |
| Simplify the ERP to focus on competing claims which seem to be of a non-complex nature using a simple set of presumptions, such as a presumption that a certain standard industry agreement was used. There is only one step involved – the party with the presumption not in their favour provides a submission to challenge its applicability. If it is challenged successfully the competing claim may move straight to internal determination under the ADR. | Adopted in full. |
| Eliminate thresholds so that regardless of the dollar value of the claim the same ADR pathway options are available to all members. As such, internal determinations by Screenrights will be a resolution pathway available to all members regardless of the value of their competing claims, and not just available for competing claims of medium value. If a member is unsatisfied with the outcome, an expert determination process will be available. However, there may be costs involved unless the Expert finds in favour of the member. | Adopted in full. |
| Extend the options for a member to resolve a competing claim without amending their registration, including waiving their claim for a given royalty on a one-off basis or sharing the royalties subject to a competing claim, such options to be made available at any time. | Limited adoption. |
| Remove Presumption 9 from the ERP and incorporate it into the CCRP as a mechanism for applying earlier decisions as precedents to competing claims arising over the same rights. Presumption 9 reads, “Where a Competing Claim has been resolved by an independent expert under the Competing Claim Resolution Procedures or otherwise resolved by a decision made under the ADR Procedure for Competing Claims, any determination or decision can be relied on to resolve future Competing Claims in relation to the same rights.” | Adopted in full. |
| Adopted in full. | Adopted in full. *In 2019/20, only one round will be conducted due to the timing of the introduction of the new policy |
| Where a member has requested an Independent Expert Determination, rather than relying on one organisation to source an independent expert each time, a panel of independent experts will be established to allow members to nominate preferred experts for their matter. Reasonable efforts will be made to engage an expert that both parties to the competing claim have in their preferred list. | Adopted in full. |
| Remove or amend registrations consistently on the basis of any determinations under the CCRP. | Adopted. Registrations withdrawn or adjusted on the basis of determinations at any stage of the CCRP will have status, ‘Withdrawn’. Members whose registrations are withdrawn under the CCRP will have the opportunity to reinstate their claim to future royalties if they are able to provide new evidence not considered in the triggering determination. |