Decision for dispute CAC-UDRP-108079

The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.

The Complainant is the proprietor of International trade mark no. 907441 for a figurative mark comprising the word ALTAREA registered on 12 July 2006 in classes 35-37, 42 and 45 and French trade mark no. 4692039 for the word mark ALTAREA registered on 16 April 2021 in classes 35-37 and 41-43 pursuant to an application filed on 15 October 2020. 

The Complainant is a leading property developer in France, with an annual revenue of over 2.7 billion Euros. It was founded in 1994 and has operated primarily under the mark ALTAREA. It has registered this mark in France and, via an international registration, in other countries, as stated above. It has also registered the domain name <altarea.com> and has used it to locate its website since 31 March 1999.

The disputed domain name <altarea.shop> was registered on 5 October 2025. It does not locate any web page, but MX records have been configured. 

The Complainant contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it.

No administratively compliant Response has been filed.

The Panel finds that the Complainant has registered rights in the mark ALTAREA. The disputed domain name consists of this mark and the generic top level domain name suffix <.shop>. It is clear that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's mark.

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.

On the undisputed evidence, the Panel finds that the Respondent has not used or made demonstrable preparations to use the disputed domain name for any bona fide offering of goods or services or for any legitimate non-commercial or fair use. The Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed name and has not been authorised by the Complainant to use it.

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy.

The Panel notes the distinctive character of the Complainant's mark ALTAREA and its extensive use by the Complainant. In the absence of any explanation for its registration by the Respondent, the Panel infers on the balance of probabilities that the Respondent knew of the Complainant's use of its mark and registered the disputed domain name with the intention of obtaining some advantage from confusion due its virtual identity with the Complainant's mark. Such conduct amounts to registration and use of the disputed domain in bad faith.

In the circumstances, the Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy.

The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.

The disputed domain name is identical to Complainant's registered mark apart from addition of generic top level domain name suffix. There has been no legitimate use by the Respondent. The Panel infers bad faith on the part of the Respondent from the registration of a domain name virtually identical to the Complainant's distinctive and extensively used mark and the absence of any explanation.