Decision for dispute CAC-UDRP-108544

The Panel is unaware of any other pending or decided legal proceedings in respect of the domain name <jcdecaiux.com> (the "disputed domain name").

The Complainant, JCDecaux SE, owns registered trade marks for JCDECAUX, including:  

• International trade mark registration n. 803987, registered on 27 November 2001.

(collectively, the "Complainant's trade mark").

The Complainant also operates its official website at https://www.jcdecaux.com and owns a portfolio of domain names incorporating its trade mark, including <jcdecaux.com>, registered in 1997. 

A. Complainant's Assertions 

The Complainant is a global leader in outdoor advertising, operating in more than 80 countries and thousands of cities worldwide. The Complainant has used JCDECAUX name for several decades and has established a substantial international reputation in the field of out-of-home advertising.

B. Respondent's Position

The Respondent did not file a Response. 

C. Disputed Domain Name

The disputed domain name <jcdecaiux.com> was registered on 27 March 2026 and, at the timing of writing, resolves to an error page. The case file indicates that MX records have been configured in connection with the disputed domain name. 

A. Complainant 

A.1 Identical or Confusingly Similar

The Complainant submits that it owns a long-standing registered rights in the trade mark JCDECAUX. It contends that the disputed domain name reproduces that trade mark in its entirety, with the insertion of the letter "i".

The Complainant argues that this constitutes a typical example of typosquatting and does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity. The inclusion of the Top-Level Domain (the "TLD") <.com> is a standard registration requirement and does not affect the assessment.

A.2 Rights or Legitimate Interests

The Complainant submits that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name.

The Complainant states that the Respondent is not affiliated with it, has not been authorised to use the trade mark JCDECAUX, and is not commonly known by the disputed domain name.

The Complainant further submits that the disputed domain name resolves to an error page and that there is no evidence of any bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate non-commercial use.

A.3 Registered and Used in Bad Faith

The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.

It relies on the long-standing use and reputation of the trade mark JCDECAUX and contends that the Respondent must have been aware of the Complainant and its rights at the time of registration.

The Complainant further submits that the disputed domain name is a deliberate misspelling intended to create confusion and that the passive holding of the disputed domain name, together with the presence of MX records, is indicative of bad faith.

A.4 Relief Sought

The Complainant requests that the disputed domain name <jcdecauix.com> be transferred to it in accordance with paragraph 4(i) of the UDRP Policy.

B. Respondent

No Response was filed. The Panel proceeds on the basis of the uncontested evidence submitted by the Complainant and may draw appropriate inferences pursuant to Rule 14(b) of the UDRP Rules. 

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

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

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 UDRP Policy).

The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under the UDRP Policy, the UDRP Rules, and the CAC Supplemental Rules have been met. The dispute is properly before the Panel.

A. Applicable Legal Framework

Pursuant to Rule 15 of the UDRP Rules, the Panel decides on the basis of the statements and evidence submitted, in accordance with the UDRP Policy, the UDRP Rules, and any applicable principles of law.

Under paragraph 4(a) of the UDRP Policy, the Complainant must establish, on the balance of probabilities, that:

(i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;

(ii) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and

(iii) the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

B. Identical or Confusingly Similar

The Panel is satisfied that the Complainant has established rights in the trade mark JCDECAUX.

The disputed domain name incorporates that trade mark in its entirety. The insertion of the letter "i" does not prevent the Complainant's trade mark from remaining clearly recognisable and constitutes a typical example of typosquatting. The TDL is disregarded.

The Panel therefore finds the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trade mark.  

C. Rights or Legitimate Interests

The Complainant has made out a prima facie case.

The Respondent is not authorised to use the Complainant's trade mark and is not commonly known by the disputed domain name.

The disputed domain name is a misspelling of the Complainant's trade mark and resolves to an error page. There is no evidence of any bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate non-commercial use. Such use is neither fair nor legitimate. It reflects an attempt to take advantage of the Complainant's trade mark.

In the absence of any Response, the Panel finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. 

D. Registered and Used in Bad Faith

The Complainant's trade mark JCDECAUX is long established.

The disputed domain name incorporates that trade mark with a minor typographical variation. The Panel is satisfied that the Respondent was aware of the Complainant at the time of registration.

The registration of a typosquatted domain name is strong evidence of bad faith. The disputed domain name resolves to an inactive page. Passive holding does not prevent a finding of bad faith in circumstances where the composition of the domain name and the surrounding facts indicate abusive conduct.

The Panel also notes the presence of MX records. In the context of typosquatting domain name, this raises a risk of email-based misuse and reinforces the finding of bad faith.

The Panel therefore finds that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.

E. Decision

For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraph 4(i) of the UDRP Policy and Rule 15 of the UDRP Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name <jcdecaiux.com> be transferred to the Complainant, JCDecaux SE.