I have been asked to contact you by Mr Gerry Coulter, who wishes to say:

(1) Under United Kingdom Human Rights legislation (Human Rights Act 1998) derived from the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (incorporated into International Law) to which both the U.S. and Canada are signatories, Mr Coulter is entitled to a "fair hearing", i.e. the right to have sufficient time to answer matters in judicial or semi-judicial proceedings and that right cannot be over-ridden by domestic tribunals. This right exists under domestic law and under international law.

(2) The complainant, Dorset Police, will be well aware of the requirements of the Human Rights Act 1998 and their obligations to comply with it and the relevant international law.

(3) The grounds for disputing the domain name, filed by the complainant Dorset Police, and a number of material facts in their submission are disputed by Mr Coulter who has been involved in a long legal dispute with Dorset Police, which is on-going.

(4) In order to present his case properly, Mr Coulter needs time with his legal advisors to document and argue his case for the retention of the domain names dorsetpolice.com and dorsetpolice.net

(5) Mr Coulter says that many times during his dispute with Dorset Police they have been dishonest and behaved in a disreputable manner, and Mr Coulter and his lawyers need time to go through the case files to document Dorset Police's bad-faith and poor behaviour.

(6) In addition, Mr Coulter needs time to consult with his (Japanese) wife, currently visiting Japan, as she has an involvement in Mr Coulter's on-going dispute with Dorset Police.

(7) It is currently a time of year in the UK when lawyers and other professionals are away on holiday for weeks at a time. Mr Coulter's lawyer is currently on holiday.

(8) For your consideration and convenience, and to support this application, Mr Coulter has posted a *.pdf image file of a fax he received recently from his lawyers. Although this is a private fax between Mr Coulter and his legal advisors, Mr Coulter has nothing to hide and is happy to allow it to be read by others.

The file is here: http://www.dorset-police.com/internet-tribunal/coulter-fax.pdf

(9) Mr Coulter's lawyer says "I am well aware that you do, in fact, have grievances with Dorset Police.." and "so far as you are concerned, there has been no investigation undertaken by the Police." This clearly contradicts what Dorset Police have claimed.

(10) Further, he goes on to say: "It does seem unreasonable that in a matter of this nature eResolution are asking for time limits to be complied with when they must know that over here a substantial number of lawyers go on holiday in August. It can only assist the wheels of justice if proper and considered replies are given."

(11) In view of the complicated background to this complaint and what is said here and in his lawyer's fax (a copy available at the location above), Mr Coulter asks that eResolution treats this particular case as exceptional and grants him until the last day of September 2001 to respond.

David Husband, for and on behalf of Gerry Coulter.