{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-104221",
    "time_of_filling": "2021-12-08 09:21:14",
    "domain_names": [
        "bnpparibas.frl"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "BNP PARIBAS"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "maria"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is an international banking group with a presence in 68 countries. It is one of the largest banks in the world and has some 193,000 employees and a turnover of over €44 billion.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent is not known by the disputed domain name, and has not acquired trademark rights to use the Complainant's trademark it incorporates. Nor is the Respondent affiliated with the Complainant in any way or authorized to use the Complainant's trademarks.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <bnpparibas.frl> resolves to a page without substantial content.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and relate to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "PARTIES' CONTENTIONS (IN SUMMARY):\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name is identical to that of the Complainant's trademark, the Top-Level Domain name suffix being an element that can be ignored and should be according to past panel decisions (which are cited).\r\n\r\nSimilarly, the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, which is instead the highly notorious brand of the Complainant. Nor does the Respondent have any rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name and nor has the Respondent made any demonstrable effort to use the disputed domain name. The Complainant asserts in this connection the absence of rights and of any Complainant authorization, mentioned as uncontested facts above, as well as the non-substantial character of the web page the Respondent published.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant furthermore denies that any contemplated use of the domain name could conceivably be legitimate. The above circumstances, coupled with the certitude that the Respondent must have known that the disputed domain name was illegitimate, indicate bad faith registration and use.\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT: NO 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 the UDRP were met and that there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.\r\nThe Panel nevertheless remarks that the Respondent’s name, as supplied in the Registrar Verification Non-Standard Communication, is not included in the Amended Complaint. Thus, while the Complainant has doubtless performed the requisite technical steps to amend its Complaint, the Panel draws the CAC’s attention to the Panel’s concern that these steps do not appear to ensure due correspondence with the details supplied by the registrar. A Respondent can legitimately expect to be depicted accurately as a matter of procedural fairness.",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Kevin J. Madders"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2022-01-06 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant has adduced evidence that it owns the following trademarks which all remain valid:\r\n\r\n- international trademark BNP PARIBAS No. 728598, registered on 23 February 2000;\r\n- international trademark BNP PARIBAS No. 745220, registered on 18 September 2000; and\r\n- international trademark BNP PARIBAS No. 876031, registered on 24 November 2005.\r\n\r\nIt has further adduced evidence that it is the registrant of:\r\n\r\n- <bnpparibas.com>, registered on 2 September 1999;\r\n- <bnpparibas.net>, registered on 29 December 1999; and\r\n- <bnpparibas.pro>, registered on 23 July 2008.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <bnpparibas.frl> was registered on 27 November 2019.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "BNPPARIBAS.FRL": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}