{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-103166",
    "time_of_filling": "2020-07-17 09:32:29",
    "domain_names": [
        "recover-bousorama.link"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Šárka Glasslová (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "BOURSORAMA SA"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Laurent Becker)",
    "respondent": [
        "Cloud DNS Ltd"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant asserts and provides evidentiary documentation of the following facts, which are not contested by the Respondent.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is a French corporation founded in 1995, a subsidiary of Société Générale. The Complainant is pioneer and leader in three core businesses: online banking, online brokerage and online financial information. \r\n\r\nIn France, the Complainant is the online banking reference with over 2 million customers. The Complainant's main website (<boursorama.com>) is the first national financial and economic information site and the first French online banking platform.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was registered by the Respondent on 1 July 2020. At the moment of the filing of the Complaint, the disputed domain name was inactive.\r\n\r\nThe screenshot of the disputed domain name captured by the Czech Arbitration Court on 20 July 2020 also shows that the disputed domain name did not resolve to any active website.\r\n\r\nAt the moment of the drafting of the present decision, the disputed domain name resolved to a pay-per-click page with third parties' links related to online trading.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any legal proceeding, pending or decided, which relates 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 constitutes a misspelled version of its trademark. Neither the deletion of the letter <R> in the Complainant's trademark, nor the addition of the generic term <recover>, a hyphen and the use of the TLD <.link> are sufficient to escape the finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark or change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to such mark.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. The Complainant affirms that the Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant in any way. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent. Neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s trademark, or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant finally contends that the registration of disputed domain name with an intentional misspelling of the Complainant's well-known trademark and, thus, the constructive knowledge on behalf of the Respondent of the Complainant’s potential rights, as well as the non-use of the disputed domain name, clearly shows the Respondent’s bad faith both in the registration and in the use of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant, therefore, requests the transfer of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT: \r\n\r\nNo administratively compliant Response has been filed.",
    "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": [
        "Avv. Ivett Paulovics"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2020-08-22 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant relies on its company name and has sufficiently demonstrated to be owner of the European Union trademark BOURSORAMA no. 1758614, filed on 13 July 2000, registered on 19 October 2001 in the International classes (Nice Classification) 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41, 42.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant also owns a number of domain names, including the same distinctive wording BOURSORAMA, such as the domain name <boursorama.com>, registered since 1 March 1998, and <boursorama-banque.com>, registered since 26 May 2005.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "RECOVER-BOUSORAMA.LINK": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}