{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-107776", "time_of_filling": "2025-07-23 14:15:58", "domain_names": [ "bouyguas-uk.com" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "BOUYGUES" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "fixdtlims limsk (LTD)" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

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

Founded by Francis Bouygues in 1952, the Complainant is a diversified industrial group operating across the Construction, Energies and services, Media, and Telecoms sectors in over 80 countries, with a net profit of EUR 56.8 billion in 2024. Bouygues UK, a subsidiary, operates within the UK market.<\/p>\n

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

The Respondent has failed to submit a Response in this ADR proceeding; consequently, the Complainant's factual assertions remain uncontested.<\/p>", "other_legal_proceedings": "

The Panel is unaware of any pending or decided legal proceedings concerning the domain name <bouyguas-uk.com> (referred to as '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<\/strong>.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 <bouyguas-uk.com> is confusingly similar to the trade mark BOUYGUES. The substitution of the letter 'e' with 'a' indicates typosquatting, a practice addressed in WIPO domain name cases. The geographic abbreviation 'uk' within the disputed domain name string does not alter the overall impression of connection to BOUYGUES, nor does the inclusion of the Top-Level Domain ('TLD') <.com> alleviate 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 posits that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The Respondent’s Whois details do not align with the disputed domain name, and there is no affiliation or authorisation from the Complainant. The typosquatting nature of the disputed domain name supports the claim of a lack of legitimate interest. Furthermore, the presence of a parking page with commercial links indicates a non-bona fide<\/em> offering.<\/p>\n

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

The Complainant contends that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name in bad faith, as evidenced by the distinctiveness of the trade mark BOUYGUES and the reasonable inference of the Respondent's prior knowledge of its notoriety (notably, Bouygues v Eric Denis<\/em>, CAC Case No. 103800, concerning the domain name <bouyges-travaux.com>). The intentional misspelling of the trade mark BOUYGUES further indicates bad faith. The parking page associated with the disputed domain name serves to attract Internet users for commercial gain – an additional indicator of bad faith. Lastly, the configuration of MX records suggests potential misuse for email purposes, reinforcing the absence of good faith.<\/p>\n

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

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

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

The Respondent has not submitted a Response in this ADR proceeding; hence, the Complainant's submissions are uncontested.<\/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 confirms that all procedural requirements under the UDRP have been duly met, with no grounds preventing a decision from being issued.<\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Gustavo Moser" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-08-17 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant, Bouygues, relies upon the following registered trade mark, among others:<\/p>\n

• <\/span>International trade mark registration no. 390771, filed on 1 September 1972, for the figurative mark BOUYGUES, in classes 6, 19, 37 and 42 of the Nice Classification.<\/p>\n

(referred to as 'the Complainant's trade mark' or 'the trade mark BOUYGUES').<\/p>\n

Additionally, the Complainant owns, through its subsidiary, several domain names including the distinctive wording 'bouygues', such as <bouygues-uk.com>, registered in 2002.<\/p>\n

The disputed domain name was registered on 16 July 2025 and currently resolves to a parking page featuring pay-per-click (PPC) commercial links (referred to as 'the Respondent's website').<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "bouyguas-uk.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }