{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-104433",
    "time_of_filling": "2022-03-23 09:17:25",
    "domain_names": [
        "fr-boursorama.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "BOURSORAMA SA"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "1337 Services LLC"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant, founded in 1995 grows in Europe with the emergence of e-commerce and the continuous expansion of the range of financial products online.\r\n\r\nPioneer and leader in its three core businesses, online brokerage, financial information on the Internet and online banking, the Complainant based its growth on innovation, commitment and transparency.\r\n\r\nIn France, the Complainant is the online banking reference with over 3,3 million customers. According to the Complainant, the portal www.boursorama.com is the first national financial and economic information site and first French online banking platform. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of several trademarks BOURSORAMA, such as the European trademark no. 1758614, registered since 19 October 2001. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant also owns a number of domain names, including the same distinctive wording BOURSORAMA, such as the domain names <boursorama.com>, registered since 1 March 1998, and <boursoramabanque.com>, registered since 26 May 2005.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <fr-boursorama.com> was registered on 16 March 2022 and resolves to a parking page.",
    "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.\r\n\r\nPARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant's contentions are the following:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that the disputed domain name <fr-boursorama.com> is confusingly similar to its trademark BOURSORAMA and its domain names associated.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the addition of the abbreviation “FR” (for France) does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant’s trademark BOURSORAMA and that it does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant, its trademark and domain names associated. \r\n \r\nMoreover, the Complainant contends that the addition of the suffix “.COM” does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the trademark BOURSORAMA. It does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant, its trademark and its domain names associated.\r\n\r\nFurther, the Complainant sustains that the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nIn this sense, the Complainant asserts that the Respondent is not identified in the Whois database as the disputed domain name and that the Respondent is not known by the Complainant. The Complainant contends that Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant in any way. The Complainant contends that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. Further, the Complainant sustains that it does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent.\r\n\r\nNeither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s trademark BOURSORAMA, or apply for registration of the disputed domain name as per the what the Complainant sustains.\r\n\r\nMoreover, the disputed domain name resolves to a parking page. The Complainant contends that Respondent did not use the disputed domain name, and it confirms that Respondent has no demonstrable plan to use the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nFurther, the Complainant sustains that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.\r\n\r\nTo this end, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's well-known trademark BOURSORAMA. \r\n\r\nTherefore, in the Complainant’s view, the Respondent has registered the disputed domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark.\r\n\r\nIn addition, the Complainant sustains that all of the results of a search of the terms “BOURSORAMA” refers to the Complainant.\r\n\r\nThus, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has registered and used the disputed domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark.\r\n\r\nBesides, the Complainant asserts that the disputed domain name resolves to a parking page. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has not demonstrated any activity in respect of the disputed domain name, and it is not possible to conceive of any plausible actual or contemplated active use of the domain name by the Respondent that would not be illegitimate, such as by being a passing off, an infringement of consumer protection legislation, or an infringement of the Complainant’s rights under trademark law. \r\n\r\nOn these bases, the Complainant asserts that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith. \r\n",
    "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": [
        "Delia-Mihaela Belciu"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2022-04-27 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant bases its Complaint on the European Union “BOURSORAMA”, no. 001758614, filed on 13 July 2000, registered on 19 October 2001, for goods and services in classes 09, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41, 42.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "FR-BOURSORAMA.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}