{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-106018", "time_of_filling": "2023-12-22 13:02:59", "domain_names": [ "a4csr-sanef.com" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "SANEF" ], "complainant_representative": "Mrs Lucie PREVOST (Cabinet Vidon, Marques & Juridique PI)", "respondent": [ "Mr Alexander Kazmin" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant was established in 1963. Its name “SANEF” by which it is known by the public, is the acronym of “Société des Autoroutes du Nord et de l'Est de la France” (in English: “Motorway Company for the North and East of France”). The Complainant is a major actor in the field of motorway management. In 2005, it was acquired by the Spanish Group ABERTIS.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant’s official website is located at the domain name <sanef.com>, registered on 21 April 1998.<\/span><\/p>\n

The disputed domain name was registered on 14 May 2018 and resolves to a gambling website promoting hyperlinks to third-party online casinos. It was previously registered and used by the Complainant for the purposes of its CSR project, described below in this decision.<\/span><\/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": "

NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.<\/p>\n

COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n

The Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its SANEF trademark, because it identically reproduces the same trademark with the addition of the element “A4csr”, which is not distinctive. Rather, it is a combination of “A4” - the name of a motorway that runs from Paris to Strasbourg in the east of France, and “CSR”, which is the acronym for “Contournement Sud Reims” (in English: “South Reims Bypass”, which designated the project led by the Complainant to build a motorway bypass around the Reims agglomeration, which project was completed in 2010. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant maintains that the Respondent has no right or legitimate interest in respect of the disputed domain name, because it is not commonly known by the disputed domain name and is not affiliated with the Complainant, and the Complainant has not authorized the Respondent to use the Complainant’s SANEF trademark or to register a domain name including it. The Complainant points out that the SANEF trademark was first registered in 1993, many years before the Respondent registered the disputed domain name.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant submits that the Respondent has not used the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services. The disputed domain name resolves to a website dedicated to gambling and betting, which aims to generate traffic and commercial advantage. The Complainant points out that the disputed domain name was previously owned by it and was well known by the Complainant’s employees, in particular those involved in the CSR project. According to the Complainant, when confronted with the disputed domain name, these persons may consider its use by the Respondent to be legitimate considering the Complainant itself used it previously, thus creating a high risk for phishing attacks.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. <\/span>According to it, the Respondent knew about the Complainant’s trademark, because the Complainant is a major economic actor in motorway management, and the SANEF trademark is a coined word with a high degree of distinctiveness and is highly visible to users of French motorways. In the Complainant’s submission, the Respondent registered the disputed domain name to prevent the Complainant from obtaining it, because it is identical to the SANEF trademark and includes the descriptive term A4 combined with the element \"CSR\", which is the abbreviation for the Complainant’s motorway project. The Complainant adds that it was the previous registrant of the disputed domain name and used it to inform the public about the status of construction of the CSR project. An eventual use of the disputed domain name for the setting up of email accounts may expose current or former employees of the Complainant to the risk of phishing, as they may regard email correspondence from such accounts as originating from the Complainant. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant points out that the disputed domain name resolves to a gambling website promoting hyperlinks to third-party online casinos. According to the Complainant, such use of the disputed domain name has no relation with the elements “A4csr” and “Sanef”, and shows that the disputed domain name was registered not as a coincidence, but in a bad faith attempt to attract for commercial gain Internet users to the associated website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s SANEF trademark. <\/span><\/p>\n

RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n

The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions and did not submit any arguments or evidence in its defence.  <\/span><\/p>", "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).<\/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": [ "Assen Alexiev" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2024-02-06 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the holder of the following registrations of the trademark “SANEF” (the “SANEF trademark”):<\/span><\/p>\n

- the French trademark SANEF (combined) with registration No. 93478220, registered on 28 July 1993 for services in International Classes 35, 36 and 37; and<\/span><\/p>\n

- the European Union trademark SANEF (combined) with registration No. 008310831, registered on 27 January 2010 for goods and services in International Classes 09, 16, 25, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44 and 45.<\/span><\/p>", "decision_domains": { "a4csr-sanef.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }