{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-101640",
    "time_of_filling": "2017-08-08 10:50:22",
    "domain_names": [
        "eu-arlafoods.com "
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Aneta Jelenová (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Arla Foods Amba"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "BrandIT GmbH",
    "respondent": [
        "melanie guerin"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant is Arla Foods Amba, a global dairy company and cooperative, owned by 12,650 dairy farmers in seven countries. The company has operations worldwide, including in France through their subsidiaries Arla Foods France & Arla Foods S.a.r.l., where the Respondent resides. The company has over 19,000 employees worldwide and reached global revenue of EUR 10.3 billion in 2015. Arla is operating in France under the domain name <arlafoods.fr>. These elements, asserted by the Complainant were not refuted by the Respondent.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant owns numerous trademarks, protected throughout the world. Some of them were filed in the year 2000.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent registered the disputed domain name <eu-arlafoods.com> on June 19, 2017. \r\n\r\nThe registration agreement which applies to the disputed domain name is in French. Therefore, the proceeding should be in French. However, the Complainant has submitted observations in order to obtain that English be the language of proceeding. This request was not contested by the Respondent.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings, pending or decided, relating to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "Firstly, the Complainant has requested that English be the language of the proceeding and for it relies on several elements:\r\n-\tThe Respondent has not replied to the cease-and-desist letter sent by the Complainant nor stated that she did not understand its content;\r\n\r\n-\tThe disputed domain name includes the Complainant’s trademark. The Complainant is Danish and its business language is English;\r\n\r\n-\tThe Respondent has registered other domain names containing English terms. Hence, the Respondent seems to be familiar with the English language;\r\n\r\n-\tThe disputed domain name features the gTLD <.com>, which is commercial and applies to a large audience. If the Respondent intended to target French consumers, she would have for instance chosen the ccTLD <.fr>;\r\n\r\n-\tThe proceeding will likely be put through unnecessary trouble and delay if French was the language of the proceeding and there would be no discernible benefit to the parties or the proceeding, in the circumstances, that may be gained by maintaining the default language. \r\nSecondly, the Complainant has submitted observations on the substantive part of the proceeding.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its ARLA trademark and that the addition of the terms “foods” and “eu” increase the likelihood of confusion since they are connected to its business.  \r\n\r\nFurther, the Complainant argues that the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name and that she does not benefit from any authorization to use its trademark in any form. It also argues that the disputed domain name is not actively used in a manner that could demonstrate the will to use it in connection with a bona fide offering goods and services since it resolves to a parking website.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant indicates that the disputed domain name has been registered in bad faith because it is clear that the Respondent had the Complainant’s trademark in mind at the time of the registration. Regarding use in bad faith, the Complainant states that passive holding does not preclude use of the disputed domain name in bad faith.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent has not replied to the complaint and is therefore in default.",
    "rights": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown 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).",
    "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "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).",
    "bad_faith": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown 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).",
    "procedural_factors": "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.",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Nathalie Dreyfus"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2017-09-19 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant, namely Arla Foods Amba, owns several trademarks protected throughout the world, including the following trademarks:\r\n-\tEuropean Union trademark ARLA No. 001520899, filed on February 24, 2000, and duly renewed, covering goods in classes 1, 5, 29, 30, 31 and 32;\r\n-\tSemi-figurative European Union trademark ARLA No. 001902592, filed on October 13, 2000, duly renewed and covering goods in classes 1, 5, 29, 30 and 32;\r\n-\tSemi-figurative European Union trademark ARLA No. 009012981, filed on April 8, 2010, and covering goods in classes 1, 5, 29, 30, 31 and 32;\r\n-\tDanish trademark ARLA FOODS No. VR 2000 01185, filed on March 6, 2000, duly renewed and covering goods in classes 1, 5, 29, 30, 31 and 32.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "EU-ARLAFOODS.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}