{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-107290", "time_of_filling": "2025-02-06 09:06:35", "domain_names": [ "extleroymerlin.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "GROUPE ADEO" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "webanton hiney (hiney limited)" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

A<\/strong>. Complainant<\/strong>'s Factual Allegations<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant is a French enterprise specialising in the sale of home improvement products and services, with its flagship entity being Leroy Merlin, established in 1923.  <\/p>\n

Leroy Merlin is recognised as a leading retailer in the DYI sector, employing approximately 28,000 individuals in France.<\/p>\n

B<\/strong>.<\/span> Respondent<\/strong>'<\/span>s Factual Allegations<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Respondent has failed to submit a Response in this UDRP administrative proceeding, resulting in the Complainant's allegations remaining unchallenged.<\/p>", "other_legal_proceedings": "

The Panel is unaware of any other pending or concluded legal proceedings concerning the domain name <extleroymerlin.com> ('the disputed domain name').<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "

A<\/strong>. Complainant<\/strong>'s Submissions<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant’s contentions can be summarised as follows.<\/p>\n

A.1 The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant asserts that the disputed domain name <extleroymerlin.com> is confusingly similar to the trade mark LEROY MERLIN as it is wholly incorporated. The addition of the term 'ext', purportedly denoting the words 'extérieur' (in French) or 'exterior' (in English), does not sufficiently differentiate the disputed domain name from the Complainant's trade mark.  Nor does the inclusion of the generic Top-Level Domain (the 'TLD') <.com> mitigate the likelihood of confusion.<\/p>\n

A<\/strong>.2 The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the Respondent, identified in the Whois database as 'hiney limited', lacks rights or legitimate interests regarding the disputed domain name. The Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, and there exists no affiliation, licence, or authorisation from the Complainant allowing such use. The current inactive status of the disputed domain name further underscores the absence of any legitimate interest.<\/p>\n

A<\/strong>.3 The Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant maintains that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name in bad faith, possessing knowledge of the Complainant's prior trade mark rights, particularly given the trade mark's well-established reputation in France, where the Respondent appears to reside. The lack of active use – coupled with the incorporation of a renowned trade mark, false Whois information and the activation of MX records – strongly support the assertion of bad faith registration and use.<\/p>\n

A<\/strong>.4 Relief sought<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant requests the transfer of the disputed domain name to itself.<\/p>\n

B<\/strong>. <\/strong>Respondent<\/strong>'<\/span>s Submissions<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Respondent has defaulted in this UDRP administrative proceeding, failing to provide any substantive defence.<\/p>", "rights": "

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the UDRP 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 UDRP 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 UDRP Policy).<\/p>", "procedural_factors": "

The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under the UDRP have been duly met, with no grounds preventing a decision from being issued. <\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Yana Zhou" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-03-07 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant, Groupe Adeo, asserts rights to the following registered trade marks, among others:<\/p>\n

•  International trade mark registration no. 591251, filed on 15 July 1992, for the figurative mark LEROY-MERLIN, in classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 27, 28, 31 and 37 of the Nice Classification; and<\/p>\n

•  EU trade mark registration no. 010843597, filed on 27 April 2012, for the word mark LEROY MERLIN, in classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 31, 35, 36, 37, 40, 41, 42 and 44 of the Nice Classification.<\/p>\n

The aforementioned trade marks shall be referred to as 'the Complainant's trade mark' or 'the trade mark LEROY MERLIN'. Furthermore, the Complainant owns several domain names incorporating the name 'Leroy Merlin', notably <leroymerlin.com> and <leroymerlin.fr>, both registered in 1996.<\/p>\n

The disputed domain name was registered on 30 January 2025 and does not currently resolve to an active website (for present purposes, 'the Respondent's website').<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "extleroymerlin.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }