FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n
The Complainant is a UK-based designer, importer, seller and exporter of ladies', men's and children's footwear. The Complainant's footwear and bag products are sold throughout the world, including through its various websites registered under domain names such as <gola.co.uk> and <golausa.com>.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name was registered on March 23, 2023 and redirects to a third party site, https:\/\/www.mateimages.com\/, which purports to sell shoes of different brands, including renowned brands such as Moschino, Moncler, YSL, Versace etc.
<\/p>\n
The Complainant’s trademark and domain name registrations predate the registration of the disputed domain name.<\/p>", "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.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "
COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark<\/p>\n
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the GOLA trademark. The Complainant further affirms that the disputed domain name exactly reproduces the “GOLA” trademark with the mere addition of the generic term “shoes”, and that this combination strengthens confusion by suggesting to consumers that the disputed domain name and corresponding web site might be operated by the Complainant or with the Complainant’s authorization.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name <\/p>\n The disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith The Complainant also claims that the Respondent is using the disputed domain name with the sole purpose of impersonating the Complainant for fraudulent purposes. RESPONDENT: 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).<\/p>",
"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).<\/p>",
"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).<\/p>",
"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.<\/p>",
"decision": "Accepted",
"panelists": [
"Fabrizio Bedarida"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2023-06-05 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " The Complainant has proven to be the owner of the GOLA mark. European Union trademark GOLA reg. no. 001909936, registered on March 22, 2002.<\/p>\n European Union trademark GOLA reg. no. 003399681, registered on April 17, 2008.<\/p>\n
The Complainant contends that the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name and that the Respondent is not affiliated with or authorized by the Complainant in any way. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business dealings with, the Respondent. The Complainant further contends that the disputed domain name redirects to a website offering shoes for sale, and that this is not a bona fide<\/em> use.<\/p>\n
The Complainant contends that owing to the renown of the Complainant’s trademarks, it is presumable that the Respondent had actual knowledge of the Complainant’s distinctive trademarks.
The Complainant further contends that it is inconceivable that at the time of registration of the disputed domain name the Respondent did not know of the Complainant’s trademark and activity. Rather, the combination of the GOLA distinctive trademark, together with the generic term \"shoes” (referring to the goods sold by the Complainant), strengthens the confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant’s trademark, and the inference that the Respondent was aware of the Complainant’s trademark.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.<\/p>",
"rights": "
The Complainant is inter alia the owner of:<\/p>\n
UK trademark GOLA reg. no. UK00001097140, registered on June 14, 1978.<\/p>\n
The Complainant also owns a number of domain names that include the same distinctive wording GOLA, such as the domain name <gola.co.uk>.<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"golashoes.org": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}