FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n
The Complainant is the leading Italian banking group and also one of the protagonists in the European financial arena. Intesa Sanpaolo is the company resulting from the merger (effective as of January 1, 2007) between Banca Intesa S.p.A. and Sanpaolo IMI S.p.A., two of the top Italian banking groups.<\/p>\n
Intesa Sanpaolo is among the leading banking groups in the Euro zone, with a market capitalization exceeding 87.1 billion Euro. With market shares of more than 13% in most Italian regions, Complainant offers its services to approximately 14 million customers in Italy. Intesa Sanpaolo also has a strong presence in Central-Eastern Europe with a network of approximately 900 branches and over 7.5 million customers. Moreover, its international network specialized in supporting corporate customers is present in 25 countries, including the United States, Russia, China and India. The Complainant uses the domain name <intesasanpaolo.com> for its main corporate website.<\/p>\n
The Complainant contends that the Respondent is not affiliated with the Complainant nor authorized by the Complainant in any way to use the trademark “INTESA SANPAOLO”. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent. The Complainant asserts that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name, and that the Respondent is not related in any way to Complainant’s business. The disputed domain name does not correspond to the name of the Respondent, and the Respondent is not commonly known as “INTESASANPAOLO. According to the Complainant, there is no fair or non-commercial use of the disputed domain name. The domain name is used for a website currently blocked by Google Safe Browsing because Google identified it as fraudulent and attempting to trick visitors into sharing personal information or downloading software.<\/p>\n
The Complainant further contends that the Respondent has registered the disputed domain name in bad faith. Its trademark “INTESA SANPAOLO” is distinctive and well known around the world. The fact that the Respondent has registered a domain name that is practically identical to this distinctive brand name indicates that the Respondent had positive knowledge of Complainant’s trademark at the time of registration of the disputed domain name. In addition, if Respondent had performed even a basic Google search in respect of the phrase “INTESASANPAOLO”, the search results would have shown obvious references to the Complainant.<\/p>\n
On May 7, 2025, Complainant’s attorneys sent a cease-and-desist letter to the Respondent, asking for the voluntary transfer of the disputed domain name. Respondent did not react to this request.<\/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": "
The Complainant contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it.
No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/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": [ "Dr. Thomas Schafft" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-08-28 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
The Complainant owns the following “INTESA SANPAOLO” trademark registrations:<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name was registered on April 23, 2025, i.e., the Complainant’s trademark registrations cited above predate the registration of the disputed domain name.<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "INTESASANPAOLO.SYSTEMS": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }