{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102018",
    "time_of_filling": "2018-05-24 15:38:21",
    "domain_names": [
        "LYONDELLTERMINALS.COM"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "LyondellBasell Industries Holdings B.V."
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "PORTA, CHECCACCI & ASSOCIATI S.p.A.",
    "respondent": [
        "Wiiliams Wales - lyondell terminal"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant is part of a group of companies forming the third largest plastics, chemicals and refining group and the largest licensor of polyethylene and polypropylene technologies in the world. The Complainant’s group employs over 13,000 individuals worldwide and manufactures its products in 55 plants located in 17 countries. The Complainant’s group sells products in approximately 100 countries worldwide.\r\n\r\nIn 2010 LyondellBasell Industries N.V. was listed in the London Stock Exchange. \r\n\r\nIn 2017, the consolidated income of the LyondellBasell’s group from continuing operations amounted to USD 4,9 billion.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent registered the disputed domain name <lyondellterminals.com> on July 19, 2017.   \r\n",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "To the best of its knowledge, the Panel is not aware of any other pending or decided legal proceedings which relate to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.\r\n\r\n",
    "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": "According to the Complaint, “the Complainant of this administrative proceeding is LyondellBasell Industries Holdings B.V., filer of this Complaint also on behalf of the other interested parties (LyondellBasell Industries N.V. and Lyondell Chemical Company). The transfer decision is to be directed to the Complainant”.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that “[A]ccording to the UDRP jurisprudence any one party of multiple related parties, on behalf of the other interested parties, may bring a Complaint and is to be considered to have standing in dispute”. In support of this statement, the Complainant refers to Paragraph 1.4.2. of the  “WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition” (hereinafter, the “WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0”).\r\n\r\nThe Complainant points out that “LyondellBasell Industries N.V., LyondellBasell Industries Holdings B.V. and Lyondell Chemical Company are related companies belonging to the same group and having right in the relevant marks on which this Complaint is based”.\r\n\r\nIn these UDRP proceedings, the Panel does not believe that LyondellBasell Industries N.V. has standing to file a Complaint “also on behalf of” the two other cited entities. In order to do so, the Complainant should have made clear its intention to consolidate different proceedings in a single Complaint pursuant to Paragraph 10(e) of the UDRP Rules. In such a case, the Complainant should have listed LyondellBasell Industries N.V. and Lyondell Chemical Company as co-Complainants in the Complaint, and provided the relevant supporting arguments and evidence. \r\n\r\nThe issue discussed in Paragraph 1.4.2. of the WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0. refers to a different question, that is “[d]oes a trademark owner’s affiliate have standing to file a UDRP Complaint?”. That is the case, for example, were a UDRP Complainant wishes to rely on a trademark,  which belongs to its affiliate, such as a subsidiary, parent or holding company. The Panel will examine this matter further below.\r\n",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Angelica Lodigiani"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2018-08-04 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner of several trademarks including the word “LYONDELLBASELL”, as follows:\r\n\r\n- LYONDELLBASELL (word mark), US trademark registration No. 3634012, filed on May 7, 2008 and registered on March 24, 2009, for goods and services in classes 1, 4, 17, 35 and 42;\r\n\r\n- LYONDELLBASELL (design mark), US trademark registration No. 5096173, filed on March 6, 2015 and registered on December 6, 2016, for goods and services in classes 1, 4, 17, 42 and 45;\r\n\r\n- LYONDELLBASELL (word mark), EUTM registration No. 6943518, filed on May 16, 2008 and registered on January 21, 2009, for goods and services in classes 1, 4, 17, 42 and 45;\r\n\r\n- LYONDELLBASELL (design mark), EUTM registration No. 013804091, filed on March 6, 2015 and registered on July 2, 2015, for goods and services in classes 1, 4, 17, 42 and 45.\r\n\r\nLyondell Chemical Company a company belonging to the LyondellBasell’s group, is the owner of the following LYONDELL trademark:\r\n\r\n- LYONDELL (word mark), EUTM registration No. 1001866, filed on November 26, 1998 and registered on May 22, 2000, for goods and services in classes 1, 4, 12, 17, 20, 25 and 42.\r\n\r\nLyondellBasell Industries N.V. also owns various domain names consisting of, inter alia, the words “lyondellbasell” and “lyondell”, such as <lyondellbasell.com> which leads to the Complainant’s main website and is used since October 23, 2007, and <lyondell.com>, registered on February 21, 1987. ",
    "decision_domains": {
        "LYONDELLTERMINALS.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}