{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-103075",
    "time_of_filling": "2020-06-24 13:55:31",
    "domain_names": [
        "goldbeckgroup.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Goldbeck GmbH"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Dr. Christoph Rempe (BRANDI)",
    "respondent": [
        "Adam Ward"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant is a German construction company employing more than 7,000 people in 40 offices in several European countries.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of the domain name <goldbeck.de> which is used by the Complainant to promote its services under the trademark GOLDBECK.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <golbeckgroup.com> was registered on November 6, 2019 and has not been pointed to an active website. Based on the evidence submitted by the Complainant, which has not been challenged by the Respondent, has been used by the Respondent to send e-mails from an e-mail address based on the disputed domain name to business partners of the Complainant.  ",
    "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": "COMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that disputed domain name <goldbeckgroup.com> is confusingly similar to the trademark GOLDBECK in which the Complainant has rights as it reproduces the trademark in its entirety with the mere addition of the term “group” and the generic Top Level Domain “.com”.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant highlights that the addition of the term \"group\" generally indicates a structure under group law and is not in itself distinctive.\r\n\r\nWith reference to rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name, the Complainant states that the Respondent is in no way affiliated with the Complainant nor has it been licensed in any way to use the trademarks or to act in the Complainant’s name, and that, by using the disputed domain name for sending e-mails, it wishes to create and strengthen a likelihood of confusion among the recipients of the e-mails.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant highlights that this is the second time the same Respondent has registered a domain name using the Complainant’s mark and that the Complainant already conducted proceedings before the CAC also in early 2020 resulting with the complaint being accepted. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant submits that the Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith since the Respondent has obviously registered the domain for the sole purpose of exploiting the resulting confusion of allocation for fraudulent and business-damaging purposes to the detriment of the Complainant and its suppliers and customers. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant underlines that, for such purpose, e-mails were sent from an e-mail address based on the disputed domain name to business partners of the Complainant, in which the sender pretended to be the Complainant's managing director. The confusion of names was further intensified by the fact that the signature used in the e-mails included the Complainant’s company name and logo. The Respondent was thus deliberately misrepresenting itself as the Complainant and used the e-mails to trigger fraudulent orders. Only after a supplier became suspicious and informed the Complainant, it was clear that it was a case of attempted fraud. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant concludes that the Respondent is using the disputed domain name in bad faith for the purpose of preparing fraudulent acts or at least to discredit the Complainant, since the sender of such e-mails, sent under the disputed domain name, deliberately pretends to be the Complainant's managing director in order to obtain payments from the Complainant's suppliers or customers, if necessary, by exploiting the resulting confusion of allocations.\r\n\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": [
        "Luca Barbero"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2020-09-28 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner, inter alia, of the following trademark registrations consisting of, or comprising, GOLDBECK: \r\n\r\n- European trademark registration No. 005604723 for GOLDBECK (word mark), filed on December 20, 2006 and registered on November 6, 2007 in classes 6, 19, 36 and 37; \r\n\r\n- European trademark registration No. 015823917 for GOLDBECK (word mark), filed on September 9, 2016 and registered on March 10, 2017, in classes 6, 9, 17, 19, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40 and 42;\r\n\r\n- German trademark registration n. 303075473 for GOLDBECK (word mark), filed on February 14, 2003 and registered on May 9, 2003 in classes 6, 19, 36 and 37.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "GOLDBECKGROUP.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}