{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-108109", "time_of_filling": "2025-11-04 09:06:52", "domain_names": [ "novartisstock.xyz" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Novartis AG" ], "complainant_representative": "Abion GmbH", "respondent": [ "Liang Luo" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant is one of the biggest pharmaceutical and healthcare groups in the world. Formed in 1996 through the merger of Ciba Geigy and Sandoz, the Complainant develops innovative medical treatments and drugs. It is also the holding company of the Novartis Group. In 2024, The Novartis Group achieved net sales of USD 50.3 billion, and its total net income amounted to USD 11.9 billion. As of December 31, 2024, it employs approximately 76 000 employees.<\/p>\n

The Complainant’s products are manufactured and sold in many countries worldwide, including China. It has a large presence in China, consisting of many subsidiaries and associated companies, including Suzhou Novartis Technical Development Co., Ltd., located in Jiangsu province, close to the Respondent’s address.<\/p>\n

Due to the Complainant’s recent efforts in strengthening collaboration with Chinese partners, the Complainant’s local operations have achieved rapid growth. In the first half of 2025, the Complainant recorded USD 2.2 billion in revenue in China, representing an 8% year-on-year increase<\/p>\n

The Complainant also has a strong presence through its social media platforms such as LinkedIn, Facebook, X, and Instagram.<\/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": "

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": "

Language of the Proceeding<\/strong><\/p>\n

The language of the Registration Agreement for the disputed domain name is Chinese.  Pursuant to the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules“)<\/span>, paragraph 11(a), in the absence of an agreement between the parties, or unless specified otherwise in the registration agreement, the language of the administrative proceeding shall be the language of the registration agreement.<\/p>\n

The Complaint was filed in English. The Complainant requested that the language of the proceedings be English as the disputed domain name is composed of the Complainant’s NOVARTIS trademark and the English word “stock”, the Respondent registered the disputed domain name with the generic top level domain (“gTLD”) “.xyz” which is indicative that the Respondent is attempting to target a broader audience and not just Chinese visitors, the disputed domain name resolves to a pay-per-click (“PPC”) webpage in English and the PPC links redirect to content that is also in English. In previous UDRP proceedings, past panels have ruled that in similar cases, English should be the language of the proceedings despite the registration agreement being in English.<\/p>\n

The Respondent did not make any submissions with respect to the language of the proceeding. <\/p>\n

In exercising its discretion to use a language other than that of the registration agreement, the Panel has to exercise such discretion judicially in the spirit of fairness and justice to both parties, taking into account all relevant circumstances of the case, including matters such as the parties’ ability to understand and use the proposed language, time and costs (see WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), section 4.5.1).<\/p>\n

Having considered the circumstances of this case including the neutrality of English as a common language between parties, the fact that the disputed domain name consists of Latin characters, and fully incorporates the Complainant’s English trademark and the English word “stock”, the fact that English is a common language between both parties, and the fact that the Complainant would incur significant additional expense and delay if the Complaint was to be translated and submitted in English, the Panel determines under paragraph 11(a) of the Rules that the language of the proceeding shall be English. There does not appear to be any reasons which warrant a delay and additional expense in ordering the Complainant to translate the Complaint.<\/p>\n

Other procedural matters<\/strong><\/p>\n

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": [ "Jonathan Agmon" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-12-05 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the owner of various trademark registrations, including the following:<\/p>\n