{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-101236",
    "time_of_filling": "2016-07-11 11:16:29",
    "domain_names": [
        "larueducommerce.net",
        "larueducommerce.org"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Lada Válková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "RUEDUCOMMERCE "
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "CHAIN AVOCATS",
    "respondent": [
        "Karima Anita"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nBACKGROUND\r\n\r\nThe RueDuCommerce Company has been registered on April 27th, 1999 under the number B 422 797 720R.C.S. BOBIGNY. The address of its head office is 44 Avenue du CapitaineGlarner, 93400 ST OUEN – FRANCE.\r\n\r\nRueDuCommerce is the owner of a portfolio of Trademarks for the course of its internet-order selling business activities on web sites accessible in particular at the addresses <www.rueducommerce.com> and <www.rueducommerce.fr>.\r\n\r\nDuring more than eleven years RueDuCommerce has gained an important notoriety among the French net surfers and consumers. It is now a major e-merchant in France whose honourability and reliability are well known to the Internet users (in that regard the Complainant submits abundant proof).\r\n\r\nSince its creation in 1999, RueDuCommerce has identified its products under the trademark “Rue du Commerce”.\r\n\r\nThis active business of the Complainant is relayed by media (paper, internet and television).\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain names <www.larueducommerce.org> and <www.larueducommerce.net> were registered on February 26th, 2016.\r\n\r\nAs far as the Complainant contentions are concerned, the Complainant claims that the disputed domain names are identical to trademarks in which the Complainant has rights.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, the Complainant claims that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in disputed domain names. In that regard the Complainant contends it has not licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use its trademark “RUEDUCOMMERCE” or to apply for or use any domain name incorporating it and the Respondent has not demonstrated, as the Policy requires, that he has made preparations to use the disputed domain names in connection with a bona fide offering goods or services.  On top of that the Complainant emphasizes that nothing on the websites suggests that the Respondent is making a legitimate commercial or non-commercial business activity with the domain names because the disputed domain names have never been used.\r\n\r\nFinally, the Complainant claims that the disputed domain names were registered and have been used in bad faith for given the reputation of the Complainant the Respondent should have been aware of the Complainant’s rights at the time of registration as the Respondent was obliged to determine whether the registration of disputed domain names infringes or violates someone else's rights under paragraph 2 of the Policy. The Complainant also states that the disputed domain names are being passively held.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to disputed domain name. ",
    "no_response_filed": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.",
    "rights": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Domain Names are 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 Names (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 Names have been registered and are 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": [
        "Dr. Vít Horáček"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2016-08-09 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant has extensive trademark rights in its “RUEDUCOMMERCE” mark(s). For purposes of this proceeding, Complainant relies on trademarks registered in France (e.g. “RUE DU COMMERCE”, registered on June 27th, 2000 under number 3036950, for goods and services class 9, 16, 28, 35, 38, 41 and 42) and  European Union Trademarks (hereinafter “EUTM”)(e.g. “RUE DU COMMERCE.COM”, registered on May 14th, 2009 under number 8299381 for goods and services class 16, 35, 36, 37, 38, 41 and 42).",
    "decision_domains": {
        "LARUEDUCOMMERCE.NET": "TRANSFERRED",
        "LARUEDUCOMMERCE.ORG": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}