FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n
The Complainant was originally established in 1962 and is a vendor in the field of rainwater utilization and management systems based in Germany. The Complainant’s systems are sold in more than 80 countries around the world, including via specialist retailers and online.<\/p>\n
GARANTIA is the Complainant’s trademark for its primary product line of rainwater harvesting systems in the DIY segment. The Complainant owns multiple registered trademarks in respect of the said mark, including, for example, the registered trademarks noted above. The Complainant also makes the brand available via the domain name used for its official website, namely <garantia.com>.<\/p>\n
According to WhoIs records, the disputed domain names were both registered on October 31, 2024 by the same registrant at the same address. They point to similar websites of an approximately corresponding structure containing a mix of apparently computer-generated text in German, English or French (<garantiageschaft.com>) and in English, French or Italian (<garantiaverkaufe.com>). On each website, the Complainant’s products are being offered for sale at an unrealistic fraction of the actual market prices that is too low to be considered a discounted price. For example, the Complainant’s Columbus 6500 litre water tank is offered for EUR 97.99 on both websites when its recommended retail price is EUR 2,245.00. The said websites also use the Complainant’s copyright product images without the Complainant’s permission.<\/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
The disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the GARANTIA trademark in which the Complainant holds rights. The only differences between such mark and the disputed domain names are the addition of the term “geschaft” (“shop”) in the disputed domain name <garantiageschaft.com> and the addition of the term “verkaufe” (“sales”) in the disputed domain name <garantiaverkaufe.com>, along with the addition in each case of the domain name suffix. The Complainant’s said mark is clearly recognizable in the disputed domain names, and such descriptive additions do not avoid a finding of confusing similarity under the Policy.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain names are younger than the Complainant’s said trademark. The Complainant has not authorized the Respondent to use its distinctive mark, and there is no relationship between the Parties. The Respondent has never received any approval from the Complainant, express or implied, to use the Complainant´s trademark in the disputed domain names, or in any other manner. There is no evidence that the Respondent uses or has made demonstrable preparations to use the disputed domain names in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services. The disputed domain names are being used to impersonate the Complainant. The websites associated with the disputed domain names do not accurately disclose the Respondent’s lack of any relationship with the Complainant and do not draw a clear line between the Respondent and the Complainant. The Respondent could not sell the Complainant’s genuine products at the listed price.<\/p>\n
The Respondent is using the disputed domain names for an illegal purpose, and has used both the Complainant’s GARANTIA trademark in the disputed domain names and its COLUMBUS-TANK trademark on the associated websites. The Respondent displays unrealistic prices that do not amount to a reasonable discount for the Complainant’s product but are used to attract innocent users and make them pay for products that they will never receive. By registering and using the disputed domain names, the Respondent intentionally attempts to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its websites by deliberately creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's GARANTIA trademark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of the Respondent’s websites, this conduct falling within paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy.<\/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": "
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": [ "Andrew Lothian" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-04-02 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
The Complainant is the owner of multiple registered trademarks for GARANTIA including, for example:<\/p>\n
Canadian Registered Trademark Number TMA880656 for the word mark GARANTIA, registered on June 23, 2014; and<\/p>\n
United States of America Registered Trademark Number 4369080 for the word mark GARANTIA, registered on July 16, 2013.<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "garantiageschaft.com": "TRANSFERRED", "garantiaverkaufe.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }