{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-106196",
    "time_of_filling": "2024-01-31 12:46:28",
    "domain_names": [
        "wwwfoncia.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "EMERIA EUROPE"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "ATOUT PI LAPLACE",
    "respondent": [
        "TotalDomain Privacy Ltd"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Complainant, EMERIA EUROPE, formerly FONCIA GROUP, is a French company that offers real estate services.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Complainant is the owner of several trademark registrations consisting of or including the sign FONCIA, such as the following:<span>&nbsp; <\/span>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>international mark No. 554821 registered on June 6, 1990, in classes 36, 37 and 42;<\/li>\n<li>international word mark No. 941643 registered on May 4, 2007, in classes 35, 36, 42 and 45;<\/li>\n<li>European Union word mark No. 001470210 registered on March 6, 2001, in classes 16, 36, 37, 38, 41 and 42.&nbsp;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Complainant operates its official website through several domain names including &lt;foncia.com&gt;.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The disputed domain name &lt;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">wwwfoncia.com<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&gt; was registered on February 13, <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">2007, and resolves to a parking page with pay-per-click links.<\/span><\/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 style=\"font-weight: 400;\">COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Complainant considers the disputed domain name to be confusingly similar to a trademark in which it has rights.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Complainant claims that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. According to the Complainant, it has never given any authorization to anyone to make use of or apply for registration of the disputed domain name and has no affiliation with the Respondent. The Complainant further contends that the website linked to the disputed domain name provides links to real estate services, which are the same services that are offered by the Complainant and that this cannot amount to a bona fide commercial use. According to the Complainant, the Respondent has sought to take commercial advantage of the goodwill associated with the Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks, domain name and sign.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Finally, the Complainant considers that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. According to the Complainant, the Respondent does not make fair use of the disputed domain name which was only registered to mislead the Complainant&rsquo;s clients with typosquatting and for the purpose of selling the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: 400;\">RESPONDENT:&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant&rsquo;s contentions.&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/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": [
        "Flip Petillion"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2024-03-12 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Complainant is the holder of several trademarks including the following:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>FONCIA, international figurative mark No. 554821 registered on June 6, 1990, in classes 36, 37 and 42;<\/li>\n<li>FONCIA, international word mark No. 941643 registered on May 4, 2007, in classes 35, 36, 42 and 45;<\/li>\n<li>FONCIA, European Union word mark No. 001470210 registered on March 6, 2001, in classes 16, 36, 37, 38, 41 and 42.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul><\/ul>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "wwwfoncia.com": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}