The Complainant, GROUPE ADEO, is a French company specializing in the sale of articles covering all sectors of the home and the development of the living environment, both for individuals and professionals. The pioneering company of the Complainant is LEROY MERLIN, established in 1923. LEROY MERLIN is a DIY retailer in the home improvement and living environment market, with 28,000 employees in France.<\/p>\n
The Complainant holds many trademark registrations including “LEROY MERLIN” phrase going back to 1992 and the Complainant also holds the domain names bearing “LEROY MERLIN”, such as <leroymerlin.fr> and <leroymerlin.com>.<\/p>\n
On July 28, 2025; the Respondent registered the disputed domain name <leroymerlin-sale.shop>. The disputed domain name is currently inactive.<\/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:<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s formerly registered distinctive trademarks, as they bear the Complainant’s “LEROY MERLIN” trademark as a whole with the addition of the descriptive term “sale”, which would not prevent a finding of confusing similarity.<\/p>\n
The Complainant claims that the top-level domain “.shop” is merely technical requirement and will be disregarded, so the domain name remains confusingly similar despite its inclusion.<\/p>\n
Consequently, the disputed domain name is claimed to be confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademark.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The Complainant states that the Respondent is neither affiliated nor authorized by the Complainant in any way and neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trademarks “LEROY MERLIN”.<\/p>\n
The Respondent has no rights on the disputed domain name as the Respondent is not known as the disputed domain name and as the Respondent does not hold any trademark or domain name with “LEROY MERLIN”.<\/p>\n
Finally, before the intervention of the Complainant, the disputed domain name is claimed to be used to disrupt Complainant’s business and to attract users by impersonating the Complainant, as the Respondent displayed the Complainant’s trademark and logo. The Complainant provided copy of the website in support of such claim. Impersonation of a complainant, by using its trademark in a disputed domain name and seeking to defraud or confuse users, are claimed to indicate a lack of rights or legitimate interests by a Respondent.<\/p>\n
The Complainant argues that the Respondent is not using the disputed domain name in connection with bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate non-commercial or fair use.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n The Complainant claims that Complainant’s “LEROY MERLIN” trademarks significantly predate the disputed domain name. The Complainant states that “LEROY MERLIN” is a well-known trademark and the Complainant refers to previous panel decisions acknowledging the reputation of the Complainant’s trademark.<\/p>\n The Complainant asserts that it is inconceivable for the Respondent to be unaware of the existence of the Complainant when registering the disputed domain name. The fact that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name while knowing about the trademarks of the Complainant constitutes bad faith in registering the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n Furthermore, the disputed domain name is claimed to be pointing to an online store displaying the Complainant’s trademark and logo and selling competing goods at discounted prices. The Complainant finds that Respondent registered and uses the domain name in bad faith to create confusion with Complainant’s trademarks for commercial gain by using the identical domain name to resolve to a website offering goods in direct competition with the Complainant’s products. Using a confusingly similar domain name to trade upon the goodwill of a complainant can evince bad faith under the paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy.<\/p>\n Accordingly, the Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.<\/p>\n <\/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 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": [
"Mrs Selma Ünlü"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2025-11-17 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " The Complainant has submitted evidence, which the Panel accepts, showing that it is the registered owner of the trademarks bearing “LEROY MERLIN”, inter alia<\/em>, the following:<\/p>\n Moreover, the Complainant is also the owner of the domain names bearing the sign “LEROY MERLIN” such as the domain names <leroymerlin.fr> (registered on September 12, 1996) and <leroymerlin.com> (registered on September 13, 1996).<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"leroymerlin-sale.shop": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}\n
\n
<\/li>\n\n
<\/li>\n