{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-104337",
    "time_of_filling": "2022-02-09 09:04:52",
    "domain_names": [
        "CHRISTOFLESALE.COM"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "ORFEVRERIE CHRISTOFLE"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "NanShuang Ning "
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nCreated in 1830, the Complainant is a French company. It has been using the CHRISTOFLE Trademark for several years and enjoys a strong online reputation for goldsmith and tableware products.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was registered on 18 January 2022 and redirects to an online shop related to the Complainant’s products.",
    "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 contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the CHRISTOFLE Trademark, because the mere addition of the generic term \"SALE\" is not sufficient to escape the finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's mark.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant also contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. The Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorised 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 authorisation has been granted by the Complainant to the Respondent to make any use of the CHRISTOFLE Trademark or apply for registration of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent is using the disputed domain name to publish a website, which reproduces the CHRISTOFLE Trademark and copyrighted images, and purports to offer for sale the Complainant’s products. This suggests that the Respondent is using the disputed domain name to mislead Internet users by creating an affiliation with the Complainant. \r\n\r\nFinally, the Complainant contends that the registration of the disputed domain name that incorporates the Complainant’s well-known trademark suggests opportunistic bad faith. In registering and using the disputed domain name that incorporates the Complainant’s trade mark and including the term “SALE”, the Respondent is seeking to create an impression that its website is the Complainant’s official website targeted at consumers. Irrespective of whether the goods offered on the Respondent’s website are in fact counterfeit, the reproduction of the Complainant’s trademark and copyrighted images on the Respondent’s website without also displaying a clear disclaimer of a lack of relationship between the Respondent and the Complainant is indicative of bad faith.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant affirms that the Respondent’s purpose of registering the disputed domain name was to trade on the reputation of the Complainant and its trademark by diverting Internet users seeking the Complainant's products to its own website for financial gain.\r\n\r\nFor the above-mentioned reasons, the Complainant requests the transfer of the disputed domain name.\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": [
        "Avv. Ivett Paulovics"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2022-03-06 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant conducts its business under the company \/ trade name ORFEVRERIE CHRISTOFLE.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is owner of several registered trademarks, among which:\r\n\r\n- the international trademark CHRISTOFLE (device) no. 147143, registered since 19 May 1950 in class 14;\r\n\r\n- the international trademark CHRISTOFLE (device) no. 537802, registered since 16 June 1989 in classes 14, 18, 20;\r\n\r\n- the international trademark CHRISTOFLE (word) no. 1166291, registered since 19 April 2013 in classes 3, 8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 28, 34, 35, 37, 40.\r\n\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is also owner of a portfolio of domain names, among which CHRISTOFLE.COM, registered since 15 August 1995 and resolving to the Complainant's official website.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant's rights are hereinafter referred to as the CHRISTOFLE Trademark.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "CHRISTOFLESALE.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}