{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-108218", "time_of_filling": "2025-12-12 09:29:18", "domain_names": [ "scerwfix.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Screwfix Direct Limited" ], "complainant_representative": "Convey srl", "respondent": [ "Jerry weeks" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant is a British company founded in 1979 in Yeovil, Somerset as the Woodscrew Supply Company by Jon Goddard-Watts. Initially, it sold screws via a single-page mail-order catalogue. In 1992 the first catalogue was launched, branded as Screwfix Direct.<\/p>\n

Today Screwfix operates over 1,700 stores, employs more than 14,000 people, and generates revenue exceeding £2.5 billion. The Complainant is one of the United Kingdom’s largest multi‑channel retailers of trade tools, accessories, and hardware, operating millions of stores in Europe, Russia, and Turkey.<\/p>\n

The Complainant has registered several domain names consisting of or comprising the trademark SCREWFIX under several different TLDs, including <screwfix.com>, which was registered on July 21, 1997.<\/p>\n

The disputed domain name was registered on November 1, 2025, and resolved to a third-party website <\/span>which was advertising content related to the Complainant’s industry, such as DIY articles\/products, including woodworking items as well as Complainant's products. At the moment of this decision the disputed domain name does not resolve to an active website.<\/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": "

The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Trademark.<\/span>

Furthermore, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. In this regard, the Complainant states that the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, that it is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant in any way, that the Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent, and that neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Trademark or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant.<\/span>

Finally, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. It contends that the Respondent must have been aware of the Complainant and its Trademark at the time of registration of the disputed domain name as the Trademark is well-known and that the Respondent's use of the disputed domain name is evidence of bad faith<\/span>, as it intentionally tried to attract users by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s trademark as to the source of the website associated to the disputed domain name constitutes an evidence of bad faith registration and use.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

RESPONDENT:<\/span><\/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": [ "Stefanie Efstathiou LL.M. mult." ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2026-01-12 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the owner of the trademark \"SCREWFIX\" since 1996, with many international and national trademark registrations worldwide, including the following:<\/p>\n