{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105548",
    "time_of_filling": "2023-06-20 08:42:24",
    "domain_names": [
        "login-clients-boursorama-banque.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "BOURSORAMA"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "FG GFGS"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p>The Complainant operates in the online brokerage, financial information on the Internet, and online banking fields. In France, BOURSORAMA is the online banking reference with over 4,9 million customers. The online portal of the Complainant at \"www.boursorama.com\" is the first national financial and economic information site and first French online banking platform.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain name was registered on 14 June 2023 and resolves to a login page copying the Complainant&rsquo;s official customer access at \"https:\/\/clients.boursorama.com\/connexion\/\".<\/p>",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "<p>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": "<p>NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.<\/p>\n<p>Complainant<\/p>\n<p>According to the Complainant, the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's BOURSORAMA trademark because it incorporates this trademark entirely and the addition of the words \"login\", \"clients\" and \"banque\" cannot prevent a finding of confusing similarity.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant further maintains that the Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The Respondent is not known by the disputed domain name. The Complainant does not know the Respondent. The Respondent is not affiliated with, nor authorized by, the Complainant to make use of the BOURSORAMA trademark in any way. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent. The Respondent is not a licensee of the Complainant.&nbsp; The disputed domain name resolves to a login page copying the Complainant's official customer access. Thus, the Respondent&rsquo;s website cannot be considered as a bona fide offering of services or fair use of the disputed domain name, since the website can mislead the consumers into believing that they are accessing the Complainant&rsquo;s website.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>In respect of the registration and use of the disputed domain name in bad faith, the Complainant contends that its BOURSORAMA trademark enjoys extensive reputation. As such, and considering that the disputed domain name is used to resolve to a login page copying the Complainant's official customer access, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent was well aware of the Complainant's trademark when it registered the disputed domain name. The use of the disputed domain name to resolve to a login page copying the Complainant&rsquo;s official customer access and not containing any information about the Respondent is evidence of the fact that the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the Respondent website. Furthermore, through the login link displayed on the login page of the disputed domain name, the Respondent could collect personal information, such as passwords.<\/p>",
    "rights": "<p>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": "<p>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": "<p>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": "<p>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": [
        "Angelica Lodigiani"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-07-28 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p>The Complainant bases its Complaint on the following trademarks:<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;- BOURSORAMA, European trademark registration No. 1758614, filed on 13 July 2000 and registered on 19 October 2001, duly renewed, claiming protection for goods and services in classes 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42;<\/p>\n<p>- BOURSORAMA, French registration No. 3676762 registered since 16 September 2009, for services in classes 35, 36 and 38.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant is also the owner of the domain name &lt;boursorama.com&gt;, registered on the 1st of March 1998, and &lt;boursoramabanque.com&gt; registered on 26 May 2005.&nbsp;<\/p>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "login-clients-boursorama-banque.com": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}