How we work: engagement, confidentiality and conflicts
You are about to commit five figures – sometimes considerably more – to a domain acquisition. The person on the other side of the escrow holds registration data, perhaps a prior dispute history, and a story about chain of title that you cannot easily verify alone. Getting that wrong is not a recoverable error once the funds clear.
COGNOMEN's domain law firm engagement process covers the full arc from first contact to matter close: a conflict check before any work begins, a written engagement letter that fixes the scope and the fee basis, and confidentiality obligations that run through every stage – including respondent defense, where the same firm cannot act for both sides of a domain dispute. We work across gTLDs and ccTLDs worldwide, before WIPO, the Forum, CAC, ADNDRC, and national procedures.
This page sets out exactly how an engagement with COGNOMEN begins, what governs the relationship, and what prospective clients need to know before instructing us.
How does the conflict check work before a domain dispute or transaction?
Before any substantive advice is given, we run a conflict check against the domain name, the parties, and the zone. This step is non-negotiable – and it protects you as much as it protects the process.
In domain disputes, the conflict arises most directly between complainant and respondent. COGNOMEN acts for both sides of the market – brand owners seeking recovery and registrants defending against overreach – but never for both sides of the same dispute. That boundary is enforced at intake. If a brand owner instructs us on a UDRP complaint targeting a registrant who is already a COGNOMEN client, we will identify the conflict and decline one of the representations. We tell you that at the outset, not mid-filing.
For domain transactions and brand protection work, the conflict check also covers prior adverse positions. If we have previously advised a party on a dispute involving the same domain name, we disclose that before accepting new instructions. Domain due diligence – chain-of-title review, prior dispute history, RDAP/WHOIS data – creates a record that follows the name, not just the person. We treat that record with care.
The practical consequence: the first communication you send us should name the domain, the zone, and the other party if known. That is all we need to run the check. We aim to confirm clearance or flag a conflict within one business day.
To open a conflict check before instructing us, email info@cognomenlaw.com with the domain name, zone, and the counterparty's name if known.
What is in the engagement letter, and what does it fix?
Every COGNOMEN matter begins with a written engagement letter. No substantive work starts before it is signed. The letter does four things: it identifies the scope precisely, states the fee basis, sets the confidentiality terms, and confirms who the client is.
Scope. A UDRP complaint engagement covers preparation of the complaint, selection of the forum, filing, and – if the respondent files a response – monitoring through the panel decision and registrar implementation of any transfer. It does not automatically include a second forum filing, a court escalation, or a separate URS filing against related domains. Each of those is a separate scope item. We write the scope clearly because "domain recovery" means different things to different people, and a misaligned expectation at the start of a matter costs everyone time.
Fee basis. The engagement letter separates two distinct costs: the forum filing fee, which COGNOMEN pays and recoups from you at cost, and the legal fee, which is set on one of three models – fixed fee for standard UDRP and URS matters, hourly for respondent defense and court work, or a success-based component for high-value acquisitions by agreement. The letter states the model, the rate or band, and the billing frequency. Our indicative fee ranges are published at cognomenlaw.com/fees.html; the engagement letter confirms the figure that applies to your specific matter after a case assessment.
Confidentiality. The engagement letter incorporates our confidentiality obligations. Information you share with us – the domain name, the dispute history, the acquisition strategy, the internal trademark records – is held in confidence and used only to advise you. Where co-counsel or local litigation counsel in a relevant jurisdiction needs to be briefed, we obtain your consent before sharing.
Client identity. The letter confirms whether we are acting for a company or an individual, and – for brand-protection work – which entity in a corporate group holds the trademark rights that anchor the dispute. That matters for UDRP standing: the complainant must hold rights in a mark, and the entity filing the complaint must be the entity that holds those rights, or the complaint will fail on the first element.
How do confidentiality obligations work across complainant and respondent matters?
Confidentiality in domain disputes runs in both directions, and it creates a structural tension that a firm acting for both complainants and respondents must manage explicitly.
COGNOMEN acts for complainants in UDRP proceedings before WIPO, the Forum, the Czech Arbitration Court, and the ADNDRC. We also act for respondents – including in cases where a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH) against the complainant is sought. RDNH is a panel finding that a complaint was brought in bad faith to deprive a legitimate registrant; it carries reputational weight, and we pursue it actively where the facts support it.
What prevents information leaking between those two sides of our practice? A combination of structural and procedural controls. Matter files are segregated. Fee earners advising a complainant on a dispute against a particular registrant do not advise respondents in matters where the same complainant appears. We disclose the category of conflict – not the confidential content – when it arises. If you ask us whether we act for any other party to your dispute, we will tell you yes or no; we will not tell you the content of that advice.
For transaction work – domain purchase and sale, escrow, and brand-protection monitoring – confidentiality extends to the acquisition strategy itself. A buyer's ceiling price, a seller's motivation, and the due-diligence findings are all protected. We do not disclose to a counterparty that a buyer has retained us unless authorized to do so.
In practice, the brand protection monitoring retainer requires particular care. Monitoring generates a continuous stream of intelligence about third-party registrations, some of which may be innocuous. We share that intelligence with you; we do not act on it unilaterally or share it with other clients.
What should I expect from the process after the engagement letter is signed?
The engagement letter is the gate. Once signed, the matter moves on a defined sequence – and knowing that sequence is the clearest answer to the question of what you are paying for at each stage.
For a UDRP complaint, the sequence runs: case assessment and strategy (forum selection, element analysis, evidence audit) → complaint drafting → forum filing and fee payment → formal commencement → 20 days for the respondent to file a response → panel appointment → decision → registrar implementation of any transfer. A standard case at WIPO typically concludes in roughly two months. The expedited WIPO track, available for single-panel cases covering up to five domains, delivers a decision in approximately one month; the filing fee for that track is USD 4,000.
For a domain transaction, the sequence runs: due diligence (chain of title, prior dispute history, RDAP check, trademark clearance) → letter of intent or heads of terms → negotiation → escrow instruction → transfer verification → matter close. The due-diligence output is a written memorandum. It does not clear every risk – no diligence memorandum does – but it identifies the risks that a competent buyer needs to price or walk away from.
For respondent defense, the sequence tracks the UDRP procedural calendar: we are briefed, we review the complaint for each of the three UDRP elements, we assess the safe harbors under Paragraph 4(c), and we file a response within the 20-day window. Where RDNH is available, we flag it early and build the record for it.
In all matters, we send a status update at each stage transition. You will not be chasing us to find out where your case stands.
In a recent domain acquisition matter (a .com gTLD name, spring 2026), we uncovered a prior UDRP complaint against the domain in due diligence – a dispute that had been dismissed without transfer but that created a chain-of-title question the seller had not disclosed. The buyer used that finding to renegotiate the price before escrow closed. That is what domain due diligence is for.
Does COGNOMEN act on both sides of a transaction or dispute?
No. We do not represent buyer and seller in the same domain transaction, and we do not represent complainant and respondent in the same UDRP or ccTLD dispute.
Many people assume a specialist domain law firm acting for "both sides of the market" means it will act for both sides of a single matter. It does not. Acting for both sides of a transaction – or both parties to a dispute – is a direct conflict of interest. A firm cannot give candid advice on your ceiling price while it is also advising the counterparty, and it cannot build a legitimate-interest defense while it is drafting the complaint against you.
What we do offer is experience across both sides of the market over time, which means our complainant advice is calibrated against what a well-prepared respondent will argue, and our respondent advice is calibrated against the strongest complaint the other side could file. That cross-practice exposure benefits each individual client. It requires, as the price of that benefit, a strict conflict-checking discipline at intake.
For matters that require court action – US anticybersquatting litigation, German court proceedings for a .de domain, or other national routes – we coordinate with local litigation counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. That counsel relationship is disclosed in the engagement letter and is subject to the same confidentiality terms.
If you are weighing UDRP against a court action, or need domain due diligence before an acquisition, email info@cognomenlaw.com for a case assessment.
About COGNOMEN
COGNOMEN is an independent boutique focused exclusively on domain-name disputes. We recover, defend, and transact internet domains across generic and country-code zones, before WIPO, the Forum, CAC, ADNDRC, and national procedures, and in court where arbitration cannot reach. We act for brand owners, domain investors, and registrants – including respondent-side defense and reverse domain name hijacking. Our focus is narrow by design: domain disputes are all we do, across gTLDs and ccTLDs worldwide. To discuss a domain, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.
Related at COGNOMEN
Frequently asked questions
What exactly is included?
The engagement letter defines scope precisely. For a UDRP complaint, the fixed fee covers complaint preparation, forum filing, and monitoring through the panel decision and registrar implementation of any transfer. It does not include a follow-on court escalation, a parallel URS filing, or additional domain targets unless those are separately scoped. For a transaction, due diligence, escrow coordination, and transfer verification are each itemized. The forum filing fee is always a separate line, passed to you at cost.
What could change the number or the timeline?
The fee and timeline are set at the point of case assessment on the facts known then. What can change them: the respondent requests a three-member UDRP panel (which raises the forum fee and adds time); new domains are identified for consolidation; a court escalation is required because a UDRP transfer order is resisted at the registrar; or a due-diligence review surfaces a chain-of-title issue requiring additional research. We flag any scope change before doing the additional work and agree a revised fee in writing.
How do we start?
Send an email to info@cognomenlaw.com with the domain name, the zone, and a brief description of the issue – whether that is a recovery, a defense, an acquisition, or a brand-protection question. We will run the conflict check, confirm clearance, and schedule a case-assessment call, usually within one business day. No fee is charged for the conflict check. The engagement letter and the first invoice follow the assessment call once scope is agreed.
Author: Cordelia Roe — UDRP complainant practice & gTLD recovery; domain transactions and brand protection. Meet the team.
Speak with Cognomen Law
For a scoped view of your domain matter, contact info@cognomenlaw.com. Discuss your matter
This publication is general information and does not constitute legal advice. For advice on your situation, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.