{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-108245", "time_of_filling": "2025-12-15 09:50:00", "domain_names": [ "eonhighspeed.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Stefan Männich (E.ON SE)" ], "complainant_representative": "Dr. Julian Erfurth (Lubberger Lehment Rechtsanwälte Partnerschaft mbB)", "respondent": [ "Idah Idah" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

Facts asserted by the Complainant and not contested by the Respondent:<\/p>\n

The Complainant is a listed company and one of Europe's largest operators of energy networks and energy infrastructure and a provider of innovative customer solutions for approximately 48 million customers.  The Complainant’s E.ON trademarks are, as a result of long and intensive use, well-known to significant parts of the public in the European Union and beyond.  The Complainant operates a website under the domain name <eon-highspeed.com> in the German language, which offers its services in connection with fiber optic cables.<\/p>\n

The disputed domain name automatically redirects to a website in German with allegedly fake interviews with persons of public interest in Germany.<\/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.  Notably, the Complainant alleges that the disputed domain is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s E.ON trademark, which the disputed domain name reproduces in its entirety, only omitting the dot between E and ON.  Regardless of this, the trademark E.ON is still perceived by the Internet user.  The addition of the purely descriptive word element “highspeed” does not change anything in this respect.  The term “highspeed” is understood as reference to the Complainant’s services, in particular with regard to the Complainant’s almost identical website under its domain name <eon-highspeed.com>.<\/p>\n

The Complaint alleges that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name as the Respondent is not making a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the disputed domain name. On the contrary, the Respondent uses the disputed domain name to redirect the Internet user to a website that contains fake news or fake interviews, illegally using the trademarks of the established and well-known German news portal “Tagesschau”.   The Complainant contends that it is well established that the use of a disputed domain name can never confer rights or legitimate interests on a Respondent for fake shops and all other forms of fraud and illegal activities.<\/p>\n

The Complainant further asserts that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith, as it contains the Complainant’s well-known E.ON trademark and copies the Complainant’s domain name <eon-highspeed.com>.  According to the Complaint, there is no plausible explanation for the use of the E.ON trademark, and the almost complete adoption of the Complainant's domain name, except that users or customers of the Complainant are to be directed to the Respondent's own website. In addition to that, the Respondent is concealing its identity on the website operated under the disputed domain name.<\/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": [ "Alfred Meijboom" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2026-01-09 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant owns a number of trademark registrations, including:<\/p>\n