{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105559", "time_of_filling": "2023-06-22 09:23:08", "domain_names": [ "nouvellemajs-boursorama.com", "newauthapps-boursorama.com" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "BOURSORAMA" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ " Domain Administrator d b a privacy cloudns net (Cloud DNS Ltd)" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant is pioneer and leader in its three core businesses: online brokerage, financial information on the Internet, and online banking. In France, BOURSORAMA is the online banking reference with over 4.9 million customers. The Complainant’s portal is the first national financial and economic information site and the first French online banking platform. The Complainant also owns a few domain names, including the mark BOURSORAMA, e.g.<\/em>, the domain name <boursorama.com> registered on March 1, 1998.<\/p>\n

The disputed domain names were registered on June 16, 2023.  The domain name <nouvellemajs-boursorama.com<\/strong>> resolves to the official homepage of the Complainant’s website, and the domain name <newauthapps-boursorama.com<\/strong>> remains inactive.<\/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 names.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "

Complainant:<\/p>\n

(i) The Complainant is the owner of EUIPO trademark registration number 001758614 for the mark BOURSORAMA registered on October 19, 2001. The disputed domain names <nouvellemajs-boursorama.com<\/strong>> and <newauthapps-boursorama.com<\/strong>> are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark because the disputed domain names incorporate the Complainant’s mark in their entirety with the addition of generic terms and the “.com.” gTLD.<\/p>\n

(ii) The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names. The Respondent is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business. The Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain names. The Respondent is not affiliated with the Complainant nor authorized by the Complainant in any way to use the trademark BOURSORAMA. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent. The Respondent does not use the disputed domain names in connection with a bona fide<\/em> offering of goods or services, or legitimate noncommercial or fair use because the disputed domain name <nouvellemajs-boursorama.com<\/strong>> resolves to the official homepage of the Complainant’s website; and the disputed domain name <newauthapps-boursorama.com<\/strong>> remains inactive.<\/p>\n

 (iii) The Respondent registered and uses the disputed domain names in bad faith. The Respondent had knowledge of the Complainant’s rights in the BOURSORAMA mark before registering the disputed domain names. The incorporation of the Complainant’s well-known mark BOURSORAMA into the disputed domain names, coupled with the redirection of the disputed domain <nouvellemajs-boursorama.com<\/strong>> to the Complainant’s website and the passive holding of the disputed domain name <newauthapps-boursorama.com<\/strong>> constitutes the Respondent’s bad faith registration and use of the disputed domain names.   <\/p>\n

Respondent:<\/p>\n

NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.<\/p>", "rights": "

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed 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).<\/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 names (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 names have been registered and are being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).<\/p>", "procedural_factors": "

Preliminary Issue: Language of the Proceedings<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Panel notes that the Registration Agreement is written in Japanese, thereby making the language of the proceedings in Japanese. The Complainant has requested that the proceeding should be conducted in English. The Panel has the discretion under UDRP Rule 11(a) to determine the appropriate language of the proceedings taking the particular circumstances of the administrative proceeding into consideration. See<\/em> Section 4.5, WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition; see<\/em> also Lovehoney Group Limited v yan zhang, CAC 103917 (CAC August 17, 2021) (finding it appropriate to conduct the proceeding in English under Rule 11, despite Japanese being designated as the required language in the registration agreement). The Complainant contends that (i) t<\/span>he choice of language is related to the combined fact that the English language is the language most widely used in international relations and is one of the working languages of the Center; (ii) the disputed domain names are formed by words in Roman characters (ASCII) and not in Japanese script; and (iii) in order to proceed in Japanese, the Complainant would have had to retain specialized translation services at a cost very likely to be higher than the overall cost of these proceedings. The use of Japanese in this case would therefore impose a burden on the Complainant which must be deemed significant in view of the low cost of these proceedings.<\/p>\n

In addition to the reasons as listed above, the Panel notes that the disputed domain name <\/span><nouvellemajs-boursorama.com<\/strong>> resolves to the official homepage of the Complainant’s website, which provides services in English as well indicating the Respondent’s ability of understanding the English language.  <\/span>Pursuant to UDRP Rule 11(a), the Panel finds that persuasive argument has been adduced by the Complainant. After considering the circumstance of the present case, in the absence of the Response and no objection to the Complainant's request for the language of proceeding, the Panel decides that the proceeding should be in English.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Panel is satisfied that all other procedural requirements under UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.<\/span><\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Mr. Ho-Hyun Nahm Esq." ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-07-21 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the owner of EUIPO trademark registration number 001758614 for the mark BOURSORAMA registered on October 19, 2001.<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "nouvellemajs-boursorama.com": "TRANSFERRED", "newauthapps-boursorama.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }