{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-103334", "time_of_filling": "2020-10-27 09:34:32", "domain_names": [ "alberghiconfindustria.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ " Confederazione Generale dell'Industria Italiana - CONFINDUSTRIA", "Associazione Italiana Confindustria Alberghi" ], "complainant_representative": "Barzanò & Zanardo Roma S.p.A.", "respondent": [ "Stefan Paraniac" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe First Complainant is the principal Italian association representing manufacturing and service companies in Italy, with a voluntary membership of more than 150,000 companies of all sizes, employing a total of 5,437,488 people. It is known in short as \"Confindustria\" and was founded in 1910 by a number of Italian entrepreneurs, who formed their own association to represent and safeguard the interests of industry. Since then, Confindustria has grown substantially and supports its members, and Italian industry in general, through activities such as lobbying, research and studies, conferences, education and training, finance and credit, legal support, negotiation of contracts with local unions, etc. \r\n\r\nConfindustria is also the owner of a renowned private Italian university called “LUISS - Libera Università internazionale degli studi sociali” and of an editorial group named “Il Sole 24 Ore”, which operates through one of the most important national business newspapers (Il Sole 24 Ore) and national broadcasting radios (Radio 24) in Italy. \r\n\r\nConfindustria operates through 217 local associations and sectoral associations and federations, trade associations and associate members. Confindustria also operates internationally through a network of foreign representations. Confindustria is represented at EU level by a delegation established in Brussels since 1959. \r\n\r\nThe Second Complainant was created in 2012 through the merger of Confindustria Alberghi and Confindustria AICA. It is one of the trade associations through which the First Complainant operates. This association represents more than 2,500 entities operating in the tourism and accommodation sectors and generating a turnover of over 5 billion Euros per year. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent is resident in Rimini, Italy, and, according to his LinkedIn profile, is a revenue manager at the National Hotel of Rimini. He registered the disputed domain name on 30 July 2020. As at the date of the amended complaint and of this decision, the disputed domain name is inactive and resolves to a \"403 error\" page. There is no evidence before the Panel that the disputed domain name has ever been linked to an active website since it was registered. ", "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": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.", "rights": "The Complainants have, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark 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 Complainants have, 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 Complainants have, 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 complaint and amended complaint in these proceedings were filed jointly by the First and Second Complainants. Where multiple complaints are filed in a consolidated request, the Panel has discretion to accept the consolidated request where the criteria for consolidation as set out in paragraph 10(e) of the UDRP Rules are met. \r\n\r\nThe Panel is satisfied (i) that the consolidated complaint in these proceedings raises a common grievance by both Complainants and that registration of the disputed domain name affects both the First Complainant as trade mark owner and the Second Complainant as effective trade body member of the Frist Complainant, and therefore raises common issues; and (ii) that it would be equitable and procedurally efficient to permit consolidation, in particular, in circumstances where no administratively compliant response has been filed. It is therefore appropriate for these complaints to be consolidated and to proceed together. The Panel notes that this decision accords with the practice of panels in other similar UDRP cases (see, for example: CAC Case No 103338, Biofarma and Les Laboratoires Servier v. Ming Zhang et al; and CAC Case No 103360, Biofarma and Les Laboratoires Servier v. Oleksandr et al). Both Complainants have requested the transfer of the disputed domain name to the Second Complainant. \r\n\r\nThe Panel is therefore 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": [ "Gregor Kleinknecht" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2020-12-31 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The First Complainant, Confederazione Generale dell'Industria Italiana (Confindustria) owns a number of trade marks consisting of the name CONFINDUSTRIA, including the European word and device mark CONFINDUSTRIA and design, EUTM registration number 003701588, registered on 5 August 2005, in international classes 16, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42; and the Italian word mark CONFINDUSTRIA, registration number 687899, first registered on 20 September 1996 and renewed on 14 April 2014 under registration number 1590934, in international classes 16, 35, 36, 38, 41, and 42. \r\n\r\nIn addition, the First Complainant owns the domain name , registered on 22 May 1996, which is connected to the principal website of the First Complainant. The First Complainant asserts that it owns many other domain names but has not adduced evidence of ownership of any other domain names. \r\n\r\nThe Second Complainant, Associazione Italiana Confindustria Alberghi (AICA), owns the domain name , registered on 26 July 2012, which is connected to the Second Complainant's website. The Second Complainant is not itself said to be the owner of any trade marks. However, the Second Complainant is an effective member of the First Complainant. The statutes\/articles of association of the First Complainant provide at Article 6 under the heading \"Mandatory requirements of membership in the association system\" at lit. b. that: \"[t]he Articles of Association of the Effective Members of Confindustria must necessarily foresee ... use of the confederation logo and of the other distinctive signs of the association system pursuant to the modalities included in the implementing regulation to these Articles of Association\". The corresponding Implementing Regulation to the Articles of Association includes; in Chapter 1, paragraph 2, the obligation on members to: \"[u]se of the confederation logo and of the other distinctive signs of the confederation system ... to explain the membership of Confindustria in compliance with its brand policies\". The Second Complainant's own statutes\/articles of association provide in Article 1 that: \"The Association ... is a member of Confindustria and adopts its logo and other distinctive signs, assuming as such the role of national category member of the representation system of the Italian Industry, as defined in the Confederation's Articles of Association. In light of the above, Associazione Italiana Confindustria Alberghi acquires the consequent rights and obligations for itself and for its associates\". \r\n\r\nAs a matter of the First Complainant's statutes\/articles of association and the corresponding implementation regulations, in conjunction with the Second Complainant's own statutes\/articles of association, the Second Complainant is therefore both obliged and entitled as an effective member of the First Complainant to use the First Complainant's trade marks. The Panel is therefore satisfied that both the First and the Second Complainant enjoy rights in the trade marks CONFINDUSTRIA as identified above within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy. ", "decision_domains": { "ALBERGHICONFINDUSTRIA.COM": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }