{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-100919",
    "time_of_filling": "2015-01-27 11:22:42",
    "domain_names": [
        "credit-mutueldebretagne.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Lada Válková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "FEDERATION DU CREDIT MUTUEL DE BRETAGNE "
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Anne Morin)",
    "respondent": [
        "CYRIL MONTEIL"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nCREDIT MUTUEL DE BRETAGNE is a  federation of CREDIT MUTUEL.  It is part of the group CREDIT MUTUEL ARKEA.\r\n\r\nFounded in 1882, CREDIT MUTUEL is a major French bank, with headquarters in Strasbourg, in Alsace.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of the registered trade mark CREDIT MUTUEL DE BRETAGNE. \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <credit-mutueldebretagne.com> was registered on 8 January 2015. ",
    "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 asserts that the disputed domain name <credit-mutueldebretagne.com> is identical to its registered trademark and branded services CREDIT MUTUEL DE BRETAGNE. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant further asserts that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. It submits that according to the WIPO case No. D2003-0455, Croatia Airlines d.d. v. Modern Empire Internet Ltd., the Complainant is required to make out a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests. Once such prima facie case is made, the Respondent carries the burden of demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. If the Respondent fails to do so, the Complainant is deemed to have satisfied paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant in any way. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name and he is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business.  Further, the Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant asserts that according to the Whois information \"Registrant Name: CYRIL MONTEIL\", the Respondent is not known as CREDIT MUTUEL DE BRETAGNE.  Past panels have held that a Respondent was not commonly known by a disputed domain name if the Whois information was not similar to the disputed domain name. (See NAF - FA699652 - Braun Corp. v. Loney; and NAF - FA139720 - Tercent Inc. v. Lee Yi.)\r\n\r\nMoreover, the website in relation with the disputed domain name <credit-mutueldebretagne.com> is inactive since its registration: \"address not found\". The Complainant states that this information demonstrates that the Respondent has no legitimate interests in respect of the domain name. The Complainant submits that the Respondent could not have used the disputed domain name without infringing the Complainant's intellectual property rights.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant further asserts that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that its trade mark CREDIT MUTUEL DE BRETAGNE® is a well-known trade mark, especially in France where the Respondent is domiciled.  Thus, given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trade mark and reputation, the Complainant submits that the Respondent has registered the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trade mark and uses it for the purpose of misleading and diverting Internet traffic. (See, WIPO - D2004-0673 - Ferrari S.p.A v. American Entertainment Group Inc).\r\n\r\nThe Complainant asserts that prior WIPO UDRP panels have held that the incorporation of a famous mark into a domain name, coupled with an inactive website, may be evidence of bad faith registration and use. (See WIPO - D2000-0003 - Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows and WIPO - D2000-0400 - CBS Broadcasting, Inc. v. Dennis Toeppen).  The Complainant says this use of the disputed domain name can be considered as passive retention. (See, WIPO - DAU2013-0005 - Cobb International Limited v. Cobb Australia & New Zealand (Pty) Ltd.).\r\n\r\nThe Complainant therefore requests that the disputed domain name is transferred to the Complainant.\r\n\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nNo administratively compliant Response was filed by the Respondent. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent has filed a non-compliant Response in which he requests the transfer of the disputed domain name to the Complainant. For completeness the substance of his response is set out here. The Respondent states:\r\n\r\n“I have never registered this domain name myself, someone is using my identity.” \r\n\r\n“Hereby I certify that I never registered the disputed domain name \"credit-mutueldebretagne.com\". \r\nIn your complaint, under the \"Respondent\", my name and first name are indeed associated with my physical address but the latter is only partially correct, as my hometown is not located in \"Calvados\". Furthermore, the telephone number and email address mentioned are not mine. \r\n\r\nThis complaint came as a totally unexpected surprise as I have no use for this domain name and as I have never registered it for any reason what so ever. \r\n\r\nTherefore I respond that I have nothing to do with this complaint. Someone must have somehow used my identity. \r\n\r\nTherefore I request that the disputed domain name is transferred to the Complainant.”\r\n",
    "rights": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the 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 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 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.\r\n\r\n",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Mrs Veronica  Bailey"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2015-02-25 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner of the French trade mark CREDIT MUTUEL DE BRETAGNE, No. 1539019  registered on 30 June 1989. ",
    "decision_domains": {
        "CREDIT-MUTUELDEBRETAGNE.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}