FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n
The Complainant was founded in 1952 and it is a diversified group of industrial companies centered on four sectors of activity: Construction, Energies and services, Media and Telecoms. Operating in over 80 countries, the Complainant’s net profit attributable to the Group amounted to 56 billion euros in 2023.<\/p>\n
Its subsidiary BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION is a world player in the fields of building, public works, energy, and services (please see their website at http:\/\/www.bouygues-construction.com\/).<\/p>\n
As a global player in construction and services, BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION designs, builds and operates buildings and structures which improve the quality of people's living and working environment: public and private buildings, transport infrastructures and energy and communications networks. As leader in sustainable construction, the Group and its 32,500 employees have a long-term commitment to helping their customers shape a better life.<\/p>\n
The Complainant is also the owner of several trademarks BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION, such as the international trademark BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION n°732339 registered since April 13, 2000 and the European trademark BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION n°001589159 registered since May 16, 2001.<\/p>\n
The Complainant also owns, through its subsidiary, a number of domain names including the same distinctive wording BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION such as <bouygues-construction.com>, registered since May 10, 1999.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name <bouyques-construction.com> (hereinafter, the „Disputed Domain Name“) was registered on May 28th, 2025 and is inactive. Besides, MX servers are configured.<\/p>\n
According to Complainant’s non-contested allegations, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect of the Disputed Domain Name and the Complainant is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business.
For the purpose of this case, the Registrar confirmed that the Respondent is the current registrant of the Disputed Domain Name and that the language of the registration agreement is English.
The facts asserted by the Complainant are not contested by the Respondent.<\/p>\n
NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.<\/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": "
COMPLAINANT:
First element: Similarity
The Complainant states that the Disputed Domain Name <bouyques-construction.com> is confusingly similar to its trademarks “BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION®“.
The obvious misspelling of the Complainant’s trademarks BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION (i.e. the substation of the letter “G” by the letter “Q”) is characteristic of a typosquatting practice intended to create confusing similarity between the Complainant’s trademark and the Disputed Domain Name.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, the Complainant contends that the addition of the gTLD “.COM” does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant’s trademark. It does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the Disputed Domain Name and the Complainant, its trademark and its domain names associated.
Second element: Rights or legitimate interest<\/p>\n
The Complainant contends that the Respondent is not known as the Disputed Domain Name at the Whois database.<\/p>\n
Additionally, the Complainant contends that the Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant in any way. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent.<\/p>\n
Neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s trademark “BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION®“, or apply for registration of the Disputed Domain Name by the Complainant.<\/p>\n
Besides, the Complainant also claims that the Disputed Domain Name is a typosquatted version of the trademark “BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION®“. Typosquatting is the practice of registering a domain name in an attempt to take advantage of Internet users’ typographical errors and can evidence that a respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the domain name.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, the Disputed Domain Name is inactive. The Complainant contends that the Respondent did not use the Disputed Domain Name, and it confirms that Respondent has no demonstrable plan to use the Disputed Domain Name.<\/p>\n
Third element: Bad faith
The Complainant states that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to its trademark “BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION®“.<\/p>\n
Besides, the Complainant and its subsidiaries are well-known and present worldwide. Thus, the Respondent should have known about the Complainant at the time of the registration of the Disputed Domain Name.
Furthermore, the misspelling in the Disputed Domain Name can state that this practical was intentionally designed to be confusingly similar with the Complainant’s trademarks. Previous UDRP Panels have seen such actions as evidence of bad faith.<\/p>\n
Besides, the Disputed Domain Name is inactive. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has not demonstrated any activity in respect of the Disputed Domain Name, and it is not possible to conceive of any plausible actual or contemplated active use of the Disputed Domain Name by the Respondent that would not be illegitimate, such as by being a passing off, an infringement of consumer protection legislation, or an infringement of the Complainant’s rights under trademark law.<\/p>\n
Finally, the Disputed Domain Name has been set up with MX records, which suggests that it may be actively used for email purposes.<\/p>\n
RESPONDENT
Respondent did not reply to the Complaint.<\/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": [ "Victor Garcia Padilla" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-07-15 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
The Complainant is the owner of several trademarks consisting of the term BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION®, such as the international trademark BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION n°732339 registered since April 13, 2000 and the European trademark BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION n°001589159 registered since May 16, 2001.<\/p>\n
The Complainant also owns, through its subsidiary, a number of domain names including the same distinctive wording BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION such as <bouygues-construction.com>, registered since May 10, 1999 <\/p>", "decision_domains": { "bouyques-construction.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }