Factual Grounds
According to the Complainant, the Bolloré Group was founded in 1822. It claims to hold strong positions in all its activities around three business lines, transportation and logistics, communication and media, electricity storage and solutions.
The Complainant contends that it is one of the 500 largest companies in the world. Listed on the Paris Stock Exchange, the majority interest of the Group's stock is said to be always controlled by the Bolloré family. In addition to its activities, the Group claims to manage a number of financial assets including plantations and financial investments.
The Complainant claims to be the owner of several international trademark registrations BOLLORE®.
The Complainant also claims to own and communicate on the internet through various domain names, the main one being <bollore.com>, registered on July 25th of 1997.
The disputed domain name was registered on August 7th of 2017 by the Respondent.
Legal Grounds
I. Domain name is confusingly similar to the protected mark
The Disputed domain name <bollore-groupefinance.com> is claimed to be confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks BOLLORE® because the trademark BOLLORE® is included in its entirety.
The Complainant contends that the addition of words “Groupe Finance” and the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) suffix “.COM” does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the trademark BOLLORE® of the Complainant.
It is argued that this does not prevent the existence of a likelihood of confusion between the Disputed domain names and the Complainant, its trademark and its associated domain names.
Thus, the domain name <bollore-groupefinance.com> is argued to be confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights.
II. The Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest in the domain name(s)
According to the decision in Croatia Airlines d. d. v. Modern Empire Internet Ltd., (WIPO Case No. D2003-0455), the Complainant is required to make out a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests. Once such a prima facie case is made, the Respondent carries the burden of demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. If the Respondent fails to do so, the Complainant is deemed to have satisfied paragraph 4(a) (ii) of the UDRP.
The Complainant contends that the Respondent is not affiliated with him nor authorized by him in any way to use the trademark BOLLORE®. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent.
The Complainant asserts that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name <bollore-groupefinance.com> and that he is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business.
The Disputed domain name redirects to a website in French that refers to proposals for bank loans. There is no information about the company “Bollore Groupe Finance” on the website (no company registration number, no mailing address).
On these facts, the Complainant contends that Respondent registered the Disputed domain name in order to create a likelihood of confusion. It is argued that the Respondent attempted to attract consumers by taking advantage of Complainant's notoriety (registration of the “Bollore” trademark in domain name) and the use of the French language on the site.
According to the Complainant, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests to the disputed domain name <bollore-groupefinance.com>.
III. The domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith
The Complainant states that the Disputed domain name <bollore-groupefinance.com> is confusingly similar to its trademarks BOLLORE® and domain names associated.
Given that the trademark “Bollore” is included in the domain name and the content of the website is in French, the Complainant contends that Respondent was aware of Complainant at the time of the domain name registration.
Further, the content of the website makes reference to the company “Bollore Groupe Finance” but there is [no] information regarding its history, its address, its company registration number. The Complainant contends this company does not exist: The Chief Executive Officer in the picture is not “Desmond Purpleson” but Marion Guillou, Chief Executive Officer of INRA and Polytechnique School.
On these bases, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent has registered and is using the Disputed domain name <bollore-groupefinance.com> in bad faith.
IV. Legal basis
Again the Complainant cites the decision in Croatia Airlines d. d. v. Modern Empire Internet Ltd., (WIPO Case No. D2003-0455), according to which the Complainant is required to make out a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests. Once such a prima facie case is made, the Respondent carries the burden of demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. If the Respondent fails to do so, the Complainant is deemed to have satisfied paragraph 4(a) (ii) of the UDRP.
|