{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102987",
    "time_of_filling": "2020-03-24 08:50:19",
    "domain_names": [
        "virbact.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "VIRBAC S.A."
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Enora Millocheau)",
    "respondent": [
        "MONDIAL CONSTRUCTION AS"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "Founded in 1968 in France by Pierre-Richard Dick, the Complainant is an old and well-established company dedicated exclusively to animal health. \r\n\r\nWith a turnover of €869 million in 2018, the company ranks today as the 7th largest animal health company worldwide. Its wide range of vaccines and medicines are used in the prevention and treatment of the main pathologies for both companion and food-producing animals. \r\n\r\nPresent through health products in more than 100 countries, the company has more than 4,900 employees.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant owns several domain names incorporating the trademark VIRBAC, including <virbac.com>, registered on January 15, 2000, at which the Complainant operates its official website. \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <virbact.com> was registered on March 13, 2020 and redirects to a registrar parking page.\r\n",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the disputed domain name <virbact.com> is confusingly similar to its trademark VIRBAC as it includes the trademark in its entirety with the sole addition of the letter “t”, which does not change the overall impression of the disputed domain name as being connected to the trademark. The Complainant also submits that this is a clear case of \"typosquatting“, as the disputed domain name contains an obvious misspelling of the Complainant’s trademark. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant claims that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name since: \r\n\r\n- the Respondent has no relationship with the Complainant and does not carry out any activity for, or have any business with, the Complainant;\r\n\r\n- the Respondent has not been authorized by the Complainant to make any use of the trademark VIRBAC or apply for registration of the disputed domain name on behalf of the Complainant; and\r\n\r\n- the Respondent is not making a bona fide use or legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the disputed domain name, as the disputed domain name resolves to a registrar parking page which only confirms that Respondent has no demonstrable plan to use the disputed domain name. \r\n\r\nMoreover, the Complainant states that the Respondent deliberately registered the disputed domain name using the Complainant’s trademark, to purposely cause confusion amongst Internet users who land on the corresponding parking page, with the sole aim of profiting from the renown of the VIRBAC mark, thus clearly acting in bad faith, whilst giving the impression of being in some way affiliated to the Complainant in order to disrupt the Complainant’s business.\r\n\r\nLastly, the Complainant points out that, given the distinctiveness and reputation of its trademark VERBAC, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the disputed domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark and with the Complainant in mind. \r\n\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.",
    "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": [
        "Luca Barbero"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2020-04-29 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner, inter alia, of the following trademark registrations consisting of, or comprising, VIRBAC: \r\n\r\n- International trademark registration No. 420254 for VIRBAC (figurative mark), registered on December 15, 1975, in class 5;\r\n\r\n- International trademark registration No. 793769 for VIRBAC (figurative mark), registered on March 11, 2002, in classes 5, 38, 42 and 44.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "VIRBACT.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}