{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-108172", "time_of_filling": "2025-11-25 09:34:31", "domain_names": [ "altarealiving.com" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "ALTAREA " ], "complainant_representative": null, "respondent": [ "Iris Hernandez" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant is a leading property developer in France. Founded in 1994, the Complainant has built a unique real estate development platform and set of skills covering all major real estate asset classes, including residential, retail, office, logistics, hotel and serviced residential projects.<\/span><\/p>\n

No particular information is known about the Respondent, named Iris Hernandez, resident of Tlalnepantla de Baz Mexico, who acquired the disputed domain name <altarealiving.com> on 11 November, 2025.<\/span> <\/span><\/p>\n

The disputed domain name is not currently used in connection with any goods or services and rather resolves to a parking webpage which includes sponsored, pay-per-click, advertisement.<\/span><\/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' CONTENTIONS:<\/span><\/p>\n

Identical or confusingly similar<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant argues that the disputed domain name <altarealiving.com> and the Complainant's registered trademarks are confusingly similar. Particularly, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain name <altarealiving.com> incorporates, in its first-level portion, the Complainant’s registered trademark ALTAREA in its entirety and the descriptive term “living”. Moreover, according to the Complainant, the applicable top-level suffix “.com” must be disregarded under the similarity test as its function is merely technical and as such does not prevent the likelihood of confusion.<\/span><\/p>\n

No rights or legitimate interests<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant argues that there is no evidence at all that the Respondent is commonly known by the disputed domain name or a name corresponding to the disputed domain name, nor that the Respondent has ever offered any goods or services under the disputed domain name, nor has making any businesses with the Complainant. Moreover, the Complainant states that the Respondent has not been licensed or authorized in other way to use the Complainant’s trademarks nor to apply for or use any domain name incorporating such trademarks.<\/span><\/p>\n

Finally, according to the Complainant, the structure of the disputed domain names reveals that Respondent’s initial intention in registering the disputed domain name was to refer to the Complainant, its trademark and business activity. The disputed domain name indeed incorporates the Complainant’s trademark ALTAREA with the addition of the term “living”. Such association of terms within the disputed domain name directly refers to the Complainant and the “real estate” services it provides.<\/span> <\/span><\/p>\n

Registered and used in bad faith<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

As far as bad faith registration and use is concerned, the Complainant states that the ALTAREA trademark is widely known and has acquired a solid portion of reputation as the Complainant represents a leading property developer in France, with 2 768, 5 million euros in revenue. Consequently, according to the Complainant, the Respondent would have inevitably learnt about the Complainant, its trademark and business.<\/span><\/p>\n

Furthermore, the Complainant contents that the way how the disputed domain name is being used is evidence of use in bad faith.<\/span><\/p>\n

RESPONDENT'S CONTENTIONS:<\/span><\/p>\n

The Respondent did not submit a Response to the Complaint. Instead, the Respondent contacted the Arbitration Centre for Domain Name Disputes informally but did not file any administrative response.<\/span><\/p>\n

NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.<\/span><\/p>", "rights": "

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to trademarks in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).<\/span><\/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": [ "Hana Císlerová (Presiding Panelist)" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-12-29 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the registered owner of several trademarks for the name ALTAREA, among which the following:<\/p>\n