ISLG Migration Phase -1

Hi Harsh ,

Will do. I'll go through the spreadsheet and provide feedback later today.

A call tomorrow works. I have a call with Ketan and Savannah tomorrow morning at 8:00am Vancouver time. Could we do the call after that call at 8:30am?

Thanks,

Morgan

OK Morgan ​. it works for us. please send meeting invitation.

Hi Harsh ,

Going through the spreadsheet above, I'm starting to notice two large issues that need to addressed before I proceed further:

1. What does the untitled column mean in Dispute Master and Dispute Documents?

image.png 136 KB • Download

2. Ensure data is pulling from appropriate source outline in ISLG Meta Field Map.

There are a number of instances where ISLG Meta Field Map is not getting followed and there appears to be an attempt to pull data from the existing ISLG application. Please ensure this is corrected. Unless there is a technical reason for not following the map, which needs to be discussed before any changes are made, please ensure the ISLG Meta Field Map instructions are followed.

image.png 140 KB • Download

image.png 187 KB • Download

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Harsh ,

I did some further review of the spreadsheet, focusing particularly on the Dispute Master and Treaty Master, and marked up the spreadsheet with my changes highlighted in yellow:

ISLG-Migration-Phase1-Master Forms.xlsx 40.2 KB • Download

Further to my comments above, it appears there has been a tendency to try and pull data from the existing ISLG application, rather than the offline spreadsheets. This approach will not work, because there are many entries for Disputes and Treaties mater lists that are only available in the offline spreadsheets. This is because the scope of content available in the new ISLG application will be broader than the existing application (new ISLG application will include all disputes whereas the old ISLG only includes disputes where a dispute document is publicly available). Further to screenshots below, these entries have been stored in the UIN Master List and do not have entries in the existing ISLG application:

Disputes:

image.png 356 KB • Download

Treaties:

image.png 329 KB • Download

As a result, for Dispute and Treaties, we need to start with the offline spreadsheets as the staring point for sourcing entries in these master lists, and then pull/sync data from the existing ISLG application where gaps or inconsistencies exists.

I addition, I believe there might be a misunderstanding of the ISLG Meta Field Map. The columns relevant to the current migration are "Source of data for field upload" and "URLs & Screenshots":

image.png 101 KB • Download

The columns relevant to the sync back to the old ISLG application (i.e., pushing data back to the old application from the new ISLG application during the beta period) are "Existing ISLG field for data sync" and "URLs & Screenshots":

image.png 105 KB • Download

The latter columns are not relevant for our current purposes. This was explained in the description for the ISLG Meta Field Map: ISLG Meta Data Fields Map - TOLOGIX - ISLG App Rebuild

image.png 49.2 KB • Download

Thanks,

Morgan

Hello Harsh ,

Here are the offline spreadsheets needed to the migration:

UIN Master List (9-Jun-20).xlsx 5.91 MB • Download

ISLG - Article Citator Master (9-Jun-20).xlsm 5.6 MB • Download

All the data is these documents is up to date with the existing ISLG application: https://www.investorstatelawguide.com/CoreComponents/DocumentDatabase. As we discussed, I have made some further refinements to the ISLG Meta Data Fields Map: ISLG Meta Data Fields Map - TOLOGIX - ISLG App Rebuild.  In particular, for the Disputes, Dispute Documents and Treaties master lists, I have provided more detailed instructions on where data is to be pulled to create the applicable entries in the respective master lists.

For Disputes and Dispute Documents, please start with pulling data from the UIN Master List to create the initial entries for the masters lists. After the initial set of entries is created, fill in the missing fields with data from the Existing ISLG Application and the Article Citator Master.

For Treaties, a more field by field approached is needed. First, populate the initial entries only with the UIN field data pulled from the UIN Master List:

image.png 227 KB • Download

Second, populated the Title and Treaty Type fields with data pulled from the Existing ISLG Applications.

image.png 227 KB • Download

Third, go back to the UIN Master List and fill-in any missing Title and Treaty Type fields with data from the UIN Master List (i.e., fill-in data for entries that do not have entries in the Existing ISLG Application).

image.png 229 KB • Download

Fourth, fill-in the remaining fields with data from the Existing ISLG Application and UIN Master List based on the source listed under "Source" of data for field upload".

It is critical that we follow these steps for the Treaties master list entries because we want to prioritize UIN field data from the UIN Master List to create the initial list of entries, but we want to use the Title and Treaty Type data from the existing ISLG application if it is available. 

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

In the meantime, please proceed with pulling all the data from the Existing ISLG application and populate the following master lists in the new application:

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

As we discussed, Today we have pulled existing live ISLG database and above attached offline spread sheet in our local environment and start migration process for following 5 masters.

Meanwhile, we have updated source data column for Treaty, Arbitration, Dispute and Dispute Document master.

Once above all process will be completed then will again take one call to discuss more regarding remaining 4 masters and then will start migration process.

Please take a note that we have migrated all data up to date 10th June for both existing database and offline spreadsheet.

Also, Today we are taking rebuild.investorstatelawguide.com database where you built all master form and taking that database for migration process.

We will clean all test data and then start migration.

Hope this fine.

Great. Thanks for the update Harsh ​. That all sounds good to me.

In the meantime, I've told my team to stay away from the rebuild.investorstatelawguie.com environment until the migration is complete. Further testing will be performed on rebuilddemo.investorstatelawguide.com.

When the updates concerning the Legal Analytics Meta Fields Management Page are released, which I assume will be done in both environments, I'll proceed with building the Legal Analytics forms in rebuild.investorstatelawguide.com, but be sure not to modify any data concerning the master lists.

Thanks,

Morgan

cc: Paul ​ Irit ​

Yes Morgan ​..

You are correct. we will update legal analytics change on both environmnet rebuild and rebuilddemo.

You can test legal analytics change on rebuild.investor.com but please make sure that as of now you will not modify any master forms' s meta fields.

Good Night.

Will do Harsh . I'll start building the legal analytics forms on http://rebuild.investorstatelawguide.com/admin, but I will be careful not to disturb any of the master forms' meta fields.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

Today First we have migrated Country Master from our existing database. Now we are going to migrate Organization master from your offline spread sheet.

In Organization Master, There is a Field Country which we need to migrate.

We have found following country data discrepancy in offline spread sheet for law firm tab and Existing database for Countries.



In Existing Database                  Offline Spread Sheet (LAw Firm Tab)

Czechoslovakia                           Slovakia
Hellenic Republic (Greece)         greece
Koria(Republic)                            Koria,republic
Kyrgyz Republic                           Kyrgyzstan


Also, We don't have following 2 countries in our existing database but those countries are available in spread sheet.

Congo (Brazzaville)
Congo (Kinshasa)


Please confirm.

Ok. Thanks Harsh . We'll need to fit the offline spreadsheet values within existing database values. I'll review the values in the Article Citator Master, and send you an updated copy that will update the values in the country values for Organizations.

Morgan

Hi Morgan ​,

I assume only above mentioned countries data will be changed in spread sheet because except above mentioned countries we are in process to migrate organization master data.

Please confirm.

Hi Harsh ,

Yes, I'll send you and updated spreadsheet within the next hour with the entries that need to be updated highlighted.

Morgan

Hi Morgan ​,

OK.. But it is not urgent now. you can update those entries and send sheet by end of day.

We will update those entries by tomorrow morning.

Hi Harsh ,

Attached is updated Article Citator Master with countries updated accross the various tabs:

ISLG - Article Citator Master (9-Jun-20).xlsm 5.6 MB • Download

Further to the screenshot below, entries that have been modified under column D of the Law Firms tab are highlighted in yellow:

image.png 76.6 KB • Download

In addition, I have also made changes to the Countries tab in the Article Citator Master for your reference if issues like this arise again. Further to the screenshot below, countries highlighted in yellow do not have country entries in existing ISLG application. If these countries come up in the data migration, we will need to create a new country entry in the master list. Countries highlighted in green have been changed to match the entries in the existing ISLG application country list, but in case this issues arises again, you can refer to this tab to understand who the lists correspondent with each other.

image.png 136 KB • Download

Thanks,

Morgan

Ok Thanks Morgan ​

Paul , Irit and Nafiseh , please note that changes in the names of the countries highlighted in green above have been updated and replaced across all data in the Article Citator Master list (current version).

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

Noted. 

Thanks

Morgan , Noted as well.  Thank you.

Hi Morgan ,

Today, We were going to Migrate People Master date from offline spread sheet and found some organization (column T) UIN are not available in Law Firm Organization data but those are associated with People data.

There are total 52 people record which associated with organization but those organization are not available in Law Firm Tab.

Missing_People_OrgnizationRelationShipData.xlsx 11.1 KB • Download

We are stuck here to migrate data further. Please confirm.
 

Hi Harsh ,

Let's discuss this during the call this morning, but I did an audit of the People and Organization UINs in the list, and they are not relevant to Legal Counsel tab in the Article Citator Master, and thus, all these entries should be removed from the People list.

I'll need to confirm this with Paul , but I think we can proceed by omitting these entries from the migration.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Harsh ,

After going through everything with Paul and Nafiseh today, we've resolved the issue with the People list. Here are updated copies of the Article Citator Master spreadsheet and an updated copy of your spreadsheet above:

ISLG - Article Citator Master (9-Jun-20).xlsm 6.28 MB • Download

Missing_People_OrgnizationRelationShipData (1).xlsx 16.7 KB • Download

The issues have been resolved as follows:

1. Some entries were erroneously maintained in the People list and should be removed.

image.png 204 KB • Download

2. The remaining entries need to be maintained in the People list but their associated Organization updated:

image.png 206 KB • Download

These changes are reflected in the update Article Citator Master People tab:

image.png 213 KB • Download

Let me know if you need any further information to proceed.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

We also nee to remove UIN validation from Publication & Non-Investment Treaty Master.

Some existing UIN entries are not matching with our New Rebuild UIN validation.

Also, We found that your team entered 3 more entries in Publication Master after 10th June in existing islg application.  But, We have already pulled database on 10th June for Migration so we  are migrating data up to 10th June 2020.

Also, We are available to discuss remaining 4 masters on next Wednesday (17/06) 7:00 AM Vancouver Time.

Please confirm. 

Hi Harsh ,

Removing the UIN validation from Publication & Non-Investment Treaty master lists is fine. However, I assume we'll still confirm that each UIN is unique to ensure we do not have conflicting UINs?

Also, please note that the ISLG application is actively being worked on and added to on a daily basis. It's understood that all content integrated into this migration will only included data on the application on June 10th, but the team should note that content will be added on an ongoing basis.

I've sent the calendar invite for a meeting on Wednesday at 8:00am Vancouver time.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Harsh and Shrinivas ,

Following up on our call earlier today. Here is a recording for the meeting:

zoom_0.mp4 123 MB • Download

Also, based on our discussions, for the Arbitration Rules master list, you only need to upload entries that are currently on the existing ISLG application, which is indicated in the UIN Master List by Uploaded to ISLG = 1:

image.png 366 KB • Download

In addition, I have updated the ISLG Meta Data Field Map with details on sourcing data for "Valid from" and "Valid to" fields from the UIN Master List:

image.png 179 KB • Download

Lastly, ideally the newly migrated data should be uploaded to the wiped version of http://rebuild.investorstatelawguide.com/admin, which would include all the legal analytics forms that I have built, and then we can use this environment to perform our legal analytics work over the months ahead.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

Following, 5 UIN are not exists in existing ISLG application under Category A for Arbitration Rule Master. but, in UIN spread sheet those 5 UIN mentioned with Uploaded to ISLG = 1

Please confirm.

Hi Morgan ,

For Issuing organization, we have following list in rebuild.

In existing application we are confusing related to  following 2 organization. like which one is related 

Existing                                                  Rebuild

ICSID Additional Facility (ICS_AF)        ?


In existing application there is one organization is  ICSID Addition Facility (ICS_AF). For this one which will consider from above list ?

Hi Morgan ,

We found that in UIN spread sheet there are duplicate UIN number in Treaty Master.

UIN number : BIT/0992

As per following screenshot, we assume there is typo mistake. As per sequence the first red block will be BIT/0975 (row no. 1399). Hence, we will do this change in our migration.

duplicate uin in treaty.png 265 KB • Download

You also please update that UIN in your spread sheet.


Also, Following 2 UIN have blank data for column J (Uploaded to ISLG).

Hence, we consider as 0 for above 2 UIN and start migration process.

Hi Morgan ,

Following UIN number does not has any Treaty Type in UIN List sheet.

Currently, We are considering as Other type. later on we will able to update the type.

Hi Morgan ,

We found that language does not exists in UIN List Sheet for Treaty Master. 

In our rebuild application the language is mandatory. Now, For those data which we need to migrate from spread sheet then which language we consider for migration ?

Hi Harsh ,

I'll review the above and provide feedback on all the issues later this morning.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

As for the duplicates in BIT and Treaties tab, I made the changes in our UIN Master List, and added 0 in column J for OTI/0320 and BIT/0996.

Thanks,

Nafiseh

Hi Harsh ,

Here are the answers to all the issues you've raise above:

1. Documents missing from Existing ISLG Application

The following documents do exist within the existing ISLG application:

ARB/0017
ARB/0056
ARB/0057
ARB/0059
ARB/0060

However, they were uploaded as Category B - Investment Treaties, rather than Category - A - Arbitration Rules. Could you please upload these documents into the Treaties master list, not the Arbitration Rules master list.

2. Issuing Organization

Please upload all documents with ICSID Additional Facility (ICS_AF) as the issuing organizations as "International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes" in the new application.

3. Duplicate UIN and missing data

Further to Nafiseh 's comment above, please see the update UIN Master list below where the BIT: Kosovo/Switzerland (2011) has been updated to BIT/0975 and "0" has been added to column J for OTI/0320 and BIT/0996.

UIN Master List (9-Jun-20).xlsx 5.92 MB • Download

4. Treaty Type

Yes, please upload the following documents with Treaty Type: Other

5. Language

I have added a column to the BIT and Treaties tab (see UIN Master List above under column F) providing the language for each document.

image.png 146 KB • Download

Nafiseh , Paul and Irit , this change has been to the active UIN Master List as well. Going forward, please ensure this columns is filled-in as new documents are added to the Master List. Note that we are only capturing the following languages:

We can added other languages post migration as needed.

Thanks,

Morgan

Noted Morgan . Thanks.

Hi Morgan ​,

For 1st Issue, How can we generate UIN number in rebuild. In rebuild application, we are generating UIN number based on treaty type. There is no such type which start prefix with ARB.

Also, I noticed that some entries 5 to 6 treaty data start with PUB and that UIN number not match with our treaty UIN validation.

Please confirm.

Hi Harsh ​,


Please remove any UIN validation on all master lists for the purposes of the migration (with the exception of the confirming the uniqueness of the UIN) that would result in changing existing UINs. We need to maintain all existing UINs to ensure we audit and cross reference data with the existing ISLG application and master list spreadsheets.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Harsh ​,

Also, I'm not sure where the UIN validation came from in the requirements. When new documents are uploaded to the system, a UIN should be automatically generated based on certain properties, but ultimately the admin user should be able to modify and determine the UIN (assuming it maintains its uniqueness, or for dispute documents, restricted to use the dispute UIN). This is something we need to ensure is implemented across the system to main the integrity of existing UINs protocols.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

As per following screenshot, In dispute matter, Can we need to append ICSID Case No. as prefix in each case number or we just need to take number (ex. ARB(AF)/00/1) ?

Also, The case number which split with & then we are considering multiple case number  (in green block) ?  

Please confirm.

Also, I'm not sure where the UIN validation came from in the requirements. When new documents are uploaded to the system, a UIN should be automatically generated based on certain properties, but ultimately the admin user should be able to modify and determine the UIN (assuming it maintains its uniqueness, or for dispute documents, restricted to use the dispute UIN). This is something we need to ensure is implemented across the system to main the integrity of existing UINs protocols.

Hi Morgan ,

Sorry. I was forgot to attached screen shot on my above comment.

As per following screenshot, In dispute matter, Can we need to append ICSID Case No. as prefix in each case number or we just need to take number (ex. ARB(AF)/00/1) ?

Also, The case number which split with & then we are considering multiple case number  (in green block) ? 

dispute_master.png 268 KB • Download

Please confirm.

Hi Harsh ​,

Please upload the text exactly as it is entered into the cell under column H. For the example you've highlighted in the screenshot, the text entered the Case Number field should be "ICSID Case Nos. ARB(AF)/04/3 & ARB(AF)/04/4".

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

In Dispute Master, Following UIN are associated with multiple nationality.(https://islg.egnyte.com/dl/lL7szP8zyU)

But, We have made meta field with Searchable drop down (it mean single nationality associated with Claimant(s).



Same things are happening in Tribunal, Annulment Committee, Tribunal (Resubmission), Annulment Committee (Resubmission) meta fields.

We have made those meta field with only searchable drop down (it mean single entry). But, some Dispute UIN have associated with multiple Arbitrator President, Arbitrator etc.

Also, There are multiple Arbitrator (Tribunal), Committee Member (Annulment Committee ), Arbitrator (Tribunal Re submission), and Committee Member (Annulment Committee (Re submission) ) meta fields we built.

But, The Source of data from spread sheet are same for example, Arbitrator and Arbitrator both field pull the data related to (C or R). so can we pull same data for both field ?



Please refer following screen shot of mapping sheet and master form.

dispute-same-field.png 218 KB • Download

dispute_tribunal.png 143 KB • Download

Please confirm.

Hi Morgan ,

Please ignore above comment. 

Just confirm the following questions.

But, We have made meta field with Searchable drop down (it mean single nationality associated with Claimant(s).

As per mapping Sheet, The both meta fields which highlighted in red block are refereed to pull data related to position for (C or R) from Tribunal Tab in Spread Sheet. 

The same scenario is happening for following meta fields :
  
Committee Member (Annulment Committee ) (pos : AC),
Arbitrator (Tribunal Resubmission) (pos : C2 or R2)
Committee Member (Annulment Committee (Re submission) )  (pos : AC2)

As per following Screenshot, can we consider first field with (C) and Second field (R).

   

dispute_tribunal.png 143 KB • Download

  Please confirm

Hi Harsh ,

Regarding the nationality of Claimants with multiple nationalities, we'll need to make modifications with the Nationality field under Parties:

image.png 25.7 KB • Download

Please change setting on field so that it is a multi-select field similar to the Nationality field in the People form:

image.png 14 KB • Download

Regarding the Appointed By field in Tribunal and Tribunal Resubmisssion, technically it shouldn't matter whether the first of second fields are assigned C or R, as long as each arbitrator get the appropriate data entered into the Appointed By field as follows:

image.png 35.5 KB • Download

However, if it makes it easier from a migration perspective to always assign C, C1, C2 or FC to the first arbitrator fields and R, R1, R2 or FR to the second arbitrator fields that's fine with me.

Thanks,

Morgan

OK Thanks Morgan ​. We are clear from your comments.

Great. Thanks Harsh ​.

Also, did we figure out how we're going to get all the data on to rebuild.investorstatelawguide.com while maintaining all the Legal Analytics forms?

Morgan

Hi Morgan ​,

Once the migration will be completed on database which we pulled on 10th June then again we will pull the databse which you are currently using on carbon 60 server and we need to again merge Leagal Analytics meta field and miscellaneous list on our migrated database.

Ok. Sounds good, Harsh . We'll start making preparations to start our work on rebuild.investorstatelawguide.com when the migration is complete.

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

There is no Document Type (Column K) associated with following Dispute Document UINs in offline spread sheet. In our rebuild application the Document Type is required field.

Please confirm.

Hi Morgan ,

The only Following Dispute Document is associated with Document Type number 9 in spreadsheet.

But, Drop down Option tab in our mapping sheet doesn't have 9 number Document Type. Please refer following screen shot.

documenttype_new.png 218 KB • Download

Please Confirm.

Ok. Thanks Harsh ​

Nafiseh ​, could you please fill in the necessary details on the UIN Master List and let me know when the changes are complete.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

Sure. I'll let you know once I am done.

Thanks,

Nafiseh

Hi Harsh ,

We've updated the UIN Master List and added the Type of Document number for the missing documents listed above. Here is an updated UIN Master List with the updated cells highlighted in yellow:

UIN Master List (9-Jun-20).xlsx 5.93 MB • Download

image.png 187 KB • Download

Thanks,

Morgan
 

Hi Harsh ,

Further to our conversation this morning, here is the updated Article Citator Master List with the arbitrator positions updated for IC/0091:

ISLG - Article Citator Master (9-Jun-20).xlsm 5.59 MB • Download

image.png 141 KB • Download

Let us know if you need anything else.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

As discussed yesterday in call, Tomorrow, We will pull the rebuild.islg database for migrate the legal analytics Meta Field and Miscellaneous list.

Hope you had built all meta field and Miscellaneous list.


Please confirm.

Hi Harsh ​,

Yes all the meta field forms are complete, so please proceed with the migration.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

For IC/0091 entries, The orange highlighted people does not exists with our people data.

IC-0091.png 122 KB • Download

Also, We are consider P1 as Arbitrator (President) - Tribunal and P2 as Arbitrator (President) - Tribunal Resubmission. 

Same as for other position :

C1&R - Tribunal
AP1 : ANNULMENT COMMITTEE 
AC1 : ANNULMENT COMMITTEE

C2&R2 - Tribunal Resubmission
AP2 : ANNULMENT COMMITTEE Resubmission
AC2 : ANNULMENT COMMITTEE Resubmission

Please confirm.

Hi Morgan ,

Could you please clarify Former Data's Start Date & Effective date of change ?

As per your attached screenshot in mapping sheet, consider To Date as Effective date of change (in new application) and From Date as Start Date (in new application).

As per following example from offline spread sheet data,

The uni number IC/0069,  To date is 23 Feb 07 and new arbitrator president start date is 4 May 06.

so, As per observation new president start date is always greater than effective date of change.

Hence, To date we should consider as Start Date and From Date is consider as Effective date of change.

Please refer following screenshot.

Former-data.png 84.4 KB • Download

Please clarify.

Hi Harsh ,

Regarding IC/0091, a mistake was made in transferring the data from the working Article Citator Master to the updated version above, please see the following, which should resolve the missing People issue:

ISLG - Article Citator Master (9-Jun-20).xlsm 5.59 MB • Download

Yes, that's correct:

P1 = Arbitrator (President) - Tribunal
P2 = Arbitrator (President) - Tribunal Resubmission
etc...

For IC/0069, there is a problem in the way you are interpreting the data in the Article Citator Master. You have assigned the Start Date (4-May-2006) from LY/473/6252 Professor Ahmed Sadek El-Kosheri (Egypt) to the Start Date for AR/0011 Professor Francisco Orrego Vicuña (Chile). Further to the screenshot below, the Start Date for AR/0011 Professor Francisco Orrego Vicuña (Chile) is blank.

image.png 76.3 KB • Download

In such cases when the Start Date for the new arbitrator is blank, please assign the same date as the Effective Date of Change for the former arbitrator. Therefore, the data should be interpreted as follows:

image.png 78.8 KB • Download

The same principle should be applied in all circumstances when the Start Date is not provided for the new arbitrator.

Thanks,

Morgan

OK Got it Morgan . Thanks for clarification.

Hi Morgan ,

There are few Former Committee Member in ANNULMENT COMMITTEE.

But, As per following screenshot, How we identified that which Former Committee Member is associated with which Committee Member ?

ANNULMENT COMMITTEE.png 99.9 KB • Download

For example, Dispute UIN IC/0104 have multiple Committee Member as per following screnshot.

IC-0104.png 77.4 KB • Download

How can we identified that which  committee members ( LY/1859/5866, AR/0207)  associated with which committee member ?

I checked there are only following uin have position FAC.

IC/0052
IC/0104
IC/0104
IC/0140
IC/0159
IC/0280 

Hi Harsh ,

Yes, I see your point. This is a flaw in the data. We'll need to provide you with specific direction on this point.

Paul and Nafiseh , could you please provide Harsh with direction on which former annulment committee members line-up with the replacement annulment committee members. Also, this might be something we need to address in how we capture this information going forward.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Harsh :

Nafiseh will upload an updated Article Citator Master soon. 

On the updated list, whenever you find a FAC within a dispute, you will also see a NAC, indicating that it is the new annulment committee member who replaced the former annulment committee member (FAC).

Let us know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Paul

Hi Harsh :

Please see the updated Article Citator Master List. The changes/updates are highlighted.

Also, in order to avoid any potential problems, I've changed all the “FAC/P” to “FACP” which you can find in the updated Article Citator Master List. 

Thanks,

Nafiseh

ISLG - Article Citator Master (9-Jun-20).xlsm 5.62 MB • Download

Hi Morgan ​,

We are planning to complete migration by end of this week.

Could we point that databse on rebuild.islg?

If yes, then please share your plan. like what you are going to do with databse?

You will add more data for all mastees or just add the legal anlytics data??

Hi Harsh ,

Ok. Great. Yes, please point the database to rebuild.islg.

Yes, we are planning to using the data to start populating the relevant data for legal analytics. No  additional dispute and dispute document master list entries will be added until we perform another update before launch in the fall; however, we will be adding additional entries to the other master lists as part of the legal analytics process.

Once the data on rebuild.islg is populated, we should treat this like the production environment. Therefore, any data added or edited for testing purposes should only be done in rebuilddemo.islg.

Thanks,

Morgan

Ok Great Morgan ​.

Now, you are going to use rebuild.islg as production environment then we  should generate ticket to Carbon 60 team to take daily backup of rebuild.islg database from Monday onwards.

That's a good point Harsh ​. Could you please contact Carbon 60 and make the request.

Thanks,

Morgan

Morgan ​, I have raised ticket to carbon 60 to take daily backup of our both database. rebuild.islg and rebuilddemo.islg.

Great. Thank you, Harsh .

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

Today, We have restored Migrated database with Legal Analytics Meta Field & Miscellaneous list and point out on rebuild.islg.

Please check and confirm.

Great. Thanks Harsh .

Paul , Irit and I will start reviewing the results and letting you know if we come across any issues. However, after my initial look, everything looks to be there.

Quick question: I noticed that it can take a long time open an entry in the Dispute Master list now that we have all the data uploaded to the system (30+ seconds). Is there a way for us to speed this up easily?

Thanks,

Morgan

Also, Harsh ,

It makes sense that you deleted the admin accounts on rebuild.islg, except the accounts for  Paul , Irit and myself.

Melissa and Naomi , if you need access to rebuild.islg let us know, but I assume all UAT and other testing can be done on rebuilddemo.islg.

Thanks,

Morgan 

No Morgan ​. We tried our best to speed up but It is depend on data. There are so many meta fields are going to create dynamically with fieldset, parent & dependent concept. In Dispute & Dispute document it will take few seconds to open. if you check to open any treaty master entry then it will be open within 2 second. It is purely depend on meta field and data which we entered.

Ok. Duly noted Harsh . Perhaps we should consider limiting the amount of meta data that is loaded when the entry is initially opened, and only loading data when it is open in the applicable field set. For example, does it load all the meta data for the field sets below when it opens the entry?

image.png 40.8 KB • Download

If so, perhaps we should only load that data when the field sets are opened?

Morgan

No Morgan ​. It is purely dynamic form.. we should pull all meta field while click on edit.  if we fix like when we click on field set then data will be render but if in future for example, if you remove any field set the  system will not capture those meta field. Hence, we should take all meta field and field set at time of edit.

Ok. Understood, Harsh . 

We'll keep things as is for the time being, but let's put some more thought in on how to improve the speed, because if took 37 seconds to open IC/0091, which is well past the maximum threshold of loading times we'd like on the application.

Thanks,

Morgan

Sure Morgan ​.. We will look into this deeply and try to find best way to increase the speed.

Great. Much appreciated Harsh .

We'll review the material and let you know if there are any data related issues.

Morgan 

Hi Morgan ,

Today, we looked in to deeply to increase the speed and we tried our best to optimize the query and we reduce the loading speed near about 20 to 25 seconds.

We checked IC/0091 dispute entry and it is taking only 12 to 13 seconds to open.

Hope this is fine. 

Ok. Thanks Harsh . I'll give this further review, and if we find other performance issue we'll report them through to-do's.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Harsh ,

We've discovered some problems with the migrated data in rebuild.investorstatelawguide.com. Could you please resolve the issues below. Also, could you please confirm that these are resolved across all Dispute record, because I'm suspicious that these issues are not isolated to the examples below.

1. Organization missing from Dispute: Counsel record. For IC/0404, the Legal Counsel tab list Gómez Acebo & Pombo Abogados as the applicable organization for certain Counsel (Claimant):

image.png 158 KB • Download

However, this organization is missing from the applicable entries in the Dispute record:

image.png 103 KB • Download

Please ensure this is resolved across all Dispute records.

2. Change in arbitrators is not getting accurately reflected in Dispute record.

Example 1 - AF/0007: Data in Article Citator Tribunals tab is as follows:

image.png 67.9 KB • Download

This means the data should be recorded as follows:

Arbitration (President): AR/0038 - Professor Vaughan Lowe, Q.C. | Start Date: 28/07/2009
-------
Historical Data:
Arbitrator (President): AR/0057 - Robert Briner | Start Date: 29/10/2007
Effective date of change: 28/07/2009

Arbitrator (President): AR/0071 - Van Vechten Veeder Q.C.
Effective date of change: 07/05/2007
-------

However, the data was recorded in the Dispute Record as follows:

image.png 59.4 KB • Download

Example 2 - IC/0091: Data in Article Citator Tribunals tab is as follows:

image.png 110 KB • Download

This means the data should be recorded as follows:

Arbitration (President): AR/0210 - Professor Pierre Lalive | Start Date: 16/03/2001
-------
Historical Data:
Arbitrator (President): AR/0064 - H.E. Judge Francisco Rezek
Effective date of change: 216/03/2001
-------

Arbitrator: LY/694/0967 - Mr. Mohammed Chemloul | Start Date: 14/07/2006
Appointed by: Claimant
-------
Historical Data:
Arbitrator: AR/0212 - Judge Mohammed Bedjaoui
Effective date of change: 14/07/2006
-------

Arbitrator: LY/0037 -  Professor Emmanuel Gaillard | Start Date: 26/08/2005
Appointed by: Respondent
-------
Historical Data:
Arbitrator: AR/0214 Ambassador Galo Leoro Franco | Start Date: 18/11/1998
Effective date of change: 26/08/2005

Arbitrator: AR/0213 - Dr. Jorge Alberto Witker Velásquez
Effective date of change: 18/11/1998
-------

However, the data was recorded in the Dispute Record as follows:

image.png 34 KB • Download

These two examples show there are significant problems in the way historical data was uploaded from the Article Citator Master that need to be remedied.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

We are looking into above issues as high priority and will update you.

Hi Morgan ,

The above all issues are resolved. The migrated data was corrected but there was minor issue in dispute page which we have resolved and updated on rebuild.islg.

Also, The above issues have resolved across all dispute data.

Please check and confirm.

Hi Harsh ,

It looks like the appropriate corrections were made for the issues raised in IC/0404 and AF/0007. However, there is still an issue with IC/0091. Further to screenshot below, the "From" date is getting inserted as the Effective date of Change", rather than the "To" date.

image.png 176 KB • Download

Also, I randomly selected another dispute (IC/0104) and found another issue:

image.png 136 KB • Download

I'm starting to get concerned that we have a systemic problem with the data in the tribunal/annulment fields. Is there a way you can perform an audit to ensure there isn't a problem with the data? We need to be confident that these issues will not arise further.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

I got your point.


For your first point, UIN no. IC/0091, We had manually entered former data due to confusion in spread sheet. In spread sheet, only for IC/00091 the former data was like (FP1, FC1, FR1).

Hence, We have decided to entered manually those former data and that's why by mistake we have entered wrong effective date.

We have updated the date. You can check it.



Morgan, Don't worry, all data haven't any problem only few Dispute UIN's Former data you need to check and provide correct one if we did any mistake. 

Due to, As per my above comment on 29th June we had some confusion in following dispute UIN 's Former data (FAC) and that's why we had entered those former data by application manually. Hence, might be there was wrong data we entered in some UIN.

Please check only following UIN's Former data once again and  let us know if there was an any mistake.

if you found any discripance in above UIN's former data then please provide the former data like as you provided on Friday for UIN no. (IC/0091) so we will update those former data in database.

Ok. Understood, Harsh . I'll audit and update the data accordingly. However, before I do, further to the videos below, there appears to be a problem with modifying historical data. Could you please resolve these issues, and then I'll audit and update the data.

Thanks,

Morgan

Need to be able to modify historical data (14-Jul-20).mp4 1.82 MB • Download

Need to be able to modify historical data (14-Jul-20)-2.mp4 1.5 MB • Download

Hi Morgan ,

The date issue we will resolve and will update you. But, As communicated with earlier with Industrial team, The Arbitrator is displaying as a label only. Hence, you are not able to change arbitrator in history data. You can change date or reason only.

Because in history data the arbitrator you can see is just label not any searchable control so it is just for display purpose.

If you want to change that arbitrator data in history then will need to create through meta field and render in history data and pull all the people data.

For this change will need to discuss further.

Ok. Harsh ​. Could explain a little further what you mean by "will need to create through meta field and render in history data and pull all the people data"? Because I can foresee situations where we may need to correct historical data that is entered incorrectly. Is there a way for us to correct this data if necessary?

Morgan

Yes Morgan . will make as control and pull the data from people list.
If you want to currently change data then provide me so i will update in database.

If you want to change historical data from master form then we need to look into it

Please confirm.

Ok. Harsh .

I suppose we can leave things as for the time being (assuming we fix the issue with the date fields reported above). However, we may have to re-examine this issue if this starts to become an issue as we perform our data capture.

Let me know when the issue is resolved, and I will complete my audit of the tribunal data for the disputes you've outlined above.

Thanks,

Morgan

OK  Morgan ​. We are working on to resolve date issue. Probably tomorrow, It will be resolved.

I will update you once it done.

Sounds good. Thanks Harsh .

Morgan 

Hi Morgan ,

The Date issue in history data is resolved and uploaded on rebuild.islg. Please check and confirm.

Hi Morgan ,

If you found any issue in following UIN's Former data then let us know so we can remove it from database so you can add it from master form.

Hi Harsh ,

I've reviewed all the disputes and corrected some errors, but could you correct the following, because I'm unable to edit the applicable field.

IC/0104:

In historical data for Annulment Committee, please replace LY/0093 Mr. Kaj Hobér with LY/1859/5866 Mr. David A.R. Williams, Q.C.

image.png 94.2 KB • Download

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

The above change has been done on rebuild.islg.

Perfect. Thanks Harsh .

Paul , all the content issue concerning the migration should now be resolved. Harsh and the team will be resolving the remaining to-do's here on Monday: ISLG Team Feedback - Fix Immediately - TOLOGIX - ISLG App Rebuild, which will ensure all the dropdown menus are performing as required. Once this is complete, we should be ready to start the Legal Analytics analysis process.

Thanks,

Morgan