{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-107640",
    "time_of_filling": "2025-06-04 11:40:46",
    "domain_names": [
        "bouyguescontructionsuk.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "BOUYGUES"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [
        "AUGUSTIN  DION"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p>The Complainant (BOUYGUES S.A.) was founded by Francis Bouygues in 1952 and it is a diversified group of industrial companies structured by a strong corporate culture. Its businesses are centred on three sectors of activity: construction (Bouygues Construction, Bouygues Immobilier), telecoms (Bouygues Telecom) and media (French TV channel TF1 and Bouygues Telecom). Operating in over 80 countries, the Complainant&rsquo;s net profit attributable to the group amounted to 1,125 million euros.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Its subsidiary BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION is a world player in the fields of building, public works, energy, and services.<\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain name &lt; bouyguescontructionsuk.com &gt; was registered on 29 May 2025 and is held by the Respondent.<\/p>\n<p>The domain name website (i.e. website to which the disputed domain name resolves) is merely parked, has no content and it is inactive. However, based on the DNS query it is apparent that the MX servers have been configured for the disputed domain name. This indicates that he disputed domain name is capable of being used for e-mail purposes.<\/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>&nbsp;<strong>COMPLAINANT:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;A) CONFUSING SIMILARITY<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;The Complainant states that:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>&nbsp;The disputed domain name contains the distinctive &ldquo;BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION&rdquo; word elements, and it is thus confusingly similar to the Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks.<\/li>\n<li>The deletion of the letter &ldquo;S&rdquo; in the term &ldquo;CONSTRUCTION&rdquo;, the addition of the letter &ldquo;S&rdquo; at the end of the term &nbsp;to form a word &ldquo;CONTRUCTIONS&rdquo; (i.e. making it plural in English) and also addition of a geographical term &ldquo;UK&rdquo; for &ldquo;United Kingdom, are not sufficient to escape the finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademarks, as it does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant, the Complainant's trademarks and its business.<\/li>\n<li>On the contrary, such geographical indication may further mislead the consumers because the Complainant also has business activities in the United Kingdom.<\/li>\n<li>Thus, according to the Complainant the confusing similarity between the Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks and the disputed domain name is clearly established.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>B) NO RIGHTS OR LEGITIMATE INTERESTS<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant states that:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The Respondent has not been commonly known by the disputed domain name.<\/li>\n<li>The Complainant has not authorized, permitted or licensed the Respondent to use Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks in any manner<\/li>\n<li>Furthermore, the domain name website has been inactive, which implies that there is no Respondent&rsquo;s intention to use the disputed domain name for legitimate purposes.&nbsp;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>C) BAD FAITH REGISTRATION AND USE<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;The Complainant states that:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks pre-dates the registration of the disputed domain name and the Respondent has never been authorized by the Complainant to register it.<\/li>\n<li>The Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks enjoy the status of well-known trademarks and the Respondent must have been aware of their existence while registering the disputed domain name.<\/li>\n<li>The purpose of the use and registration of the disputed domain has been, inter alia, an intentional attempt to attract, for commercial gain, companies by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks and its company name.<\/li>\n<li>The disputed domain name does not resolve to any genuine content, which constitutes passive holding. Registration and passive holding of a domain name, which has no other legitimate use and clearly refers to the Complainant's trademark, may constitute registration and use in bad faith.<\/li>\n<li>Finally, the disputed domain name has been set up with MX records, which suggests that it may be actively used for email purposes. This is also indicative of bad faith registration and use because any email emanating from the disputed domain name could not be used for any good faith purpose.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>RESPONDENT:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Respondent has not provided any response to the complaint.<\/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": [
        "Jiří Čermák (Presiding Panelist)"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-07-07 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p>The Complainant is, inter alia, a registered owner of the following trademarks containing the word element \" BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION&rdquo;:<\/p>\n<p>(i)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION&nbsp; (word), International (WIPO) trademark, registration date 13 April 2000, trademark registration no. 732339, registered for services in the int. class 37;<\/p>\n<p>(ii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION&nbsp; (word), EU trademark, filing (priority) date 4 April 2000, registration date 16 May 2001, trademark no. 001589159, registered for services in the int. class 37;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;besides other national, EU and International (WIPO) trademarks consisting of the \"BOUYGUES\" or &ldquo;BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION&rdquo; denomination.<\/p>\n<p>(Collectively referred to as \"Complainant's trademarks\").<\/p>\n<p>The word element \"BOUYGUES \" is also a part of the Complainant's registered company name BOUYGUES S.A. and various other companies affiliated with the Complainant.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant has also registered through its subsidiary, a number of domain names including the same distinctive denomination BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION such as &lt;bouygues-construction.com&gt;, registered since May 10, 1999.<\/p>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "bouyguescontructionsuk.com": "TRANSFERRED"
    }
}