This decision affirms dismissal of plaintiff’s complaint on judicial estoppel grounds.  In prior litigation over the same award of rights to assign .africa URLs, plaintiff took the position before an international arbitration panel that plaintiff could not sue in court over the award.  That position was completely inconsistent with its current assertion of the right to sue in court over the same award.  The arbitration was a quasi-judicial proceeding to which judicial estoppel applies.  And the arbitrators accepted plaintiff’s prior position in granting it seven advantages in the arbitration proceeding.  Plaintiff’s prior position was not taken as a result of mistake or fraud.  The public interest was served by application of judicial estoppel since plaintiff’s litigation had long delayed assignment of .africa URLs to the detriment of Africa’s residents and businesses.  Judicial estoppel applies to legal assertions as well as factual assertions.