{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-108447",
    "time_of_filling": "2026-02-27 10:31:26",
    "domain_names": [
        "miyabi-knives.org",
        "miyabiknives.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "ZWILLING J.A. Henckels AG"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Kristian Elftorp (Zacco Sweden AB)",
    "respondent": [
        "Maxim  Smirnov ",
        "Oleg  Tsegelnyk "
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Complainant points out that Miyabi is one of its brands, specialized in Japanese kitchen knives.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Complainant clarifies that Miyabi knives are manufactured in Seki (Japan) and are well-known by culinary professionals worldwide.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Complainant claims that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the &ldquo;MIYABI\" trademark. The Complainant observes that the trademark &ldquo;MIYABI\" is included in its entirety in the disputed domain names, with the addition of the generic term &ldquo;knives&rdquo; which is closely associated with the Complainant and its trademark.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><\/span>The Complainant states that shortly before the lodging of the complaint:&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>- it issued several take down and cease and desist notices regarding the disputed domain names but the Respondent did not comply with them;<\/p>\n<p>- there was no evidence that the Respondent was known by the disputed domain names or owned a corresponding registered mark;<\/p>\n<p>- there was no evidence that the Respondent used the disputed domain names in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services;<\/p>\n<p>- &nbsp;the disputed domain names were being used for a commercial purpose, in particular in the framework of an affiliate advertising program;<\/p>\n<p>- the Respondent was using the Complainant&rsquo;s logo on the websites connected to the disputed domain names;<\/p>\n<p>- the Respondent was impersonating the Complainant throughout the websites, by using statements like &ldquo;Miyabi Official Website&ldquo;.<\/p>\n<p>Taking into account the fact that the websites connected to the disputed domain names contained similar content to the Complainant's official website, the Complainant considers that the Respondent attempted to target and deceive consumers and lead them to believe that the disputed domain names are operated by the Complainant. The Complainant points out that impersonation is an example of bad faith registration and use.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Complainant submits that by creating a likelihood of confusion as to the source, sponsorship, or affiliation of the websites, the Respondent is intentionally attempting to attract internet users for commercial gain by exploiting the goodwill of the Complainant&rsquo;s mark.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><\/span><\/p>",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "<p>The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain names.<\/p>",
    "no_response_filed": "<p>The Complainant, relying on the arguments summarised above, contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain names should be transferred to it.<\/p>\n<div>\n<p><span>No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>",
    "rights": "<p>The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain names are 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": "<p>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 names (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy).<\/p>",
    "bad_faith": "<p>The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain names have been registered and are being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).<\/p>",
    "procedural_factors": "<p>CONSOLIDATION OF THE COMPLAINT FOR THE DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES<\/p>\n<p>It is well established that where the particular circumstances of a given case indicate that common control is being exercised over the disputed domain names, consolidation may be granted, provided that it would be fair and equitable to all parties.<\/p>\n<p lang=\"en-US\" align=\"JUSTIFY\">The Complainant considers that the Respondent is the same for the two domain names in dispute.<\/p>\n<p lang=\"en-US\" align=\"JUSTIFY\">The Complainant points out that the disputed domain names have been registered using the same registrar and contain the Complainant's trademark followed by the same word \"KNIVES\". The Complainant submits that the websites related to the disputed domain names have <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">visual and textual similarities<\/span>. The Complainant adds that the websites related to the disputed domain names have an<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;identical product cataloguing and refer to the same affiliate advertising program.<\/span><\/p>\n<p align=\"JUSTIFY\"><span lang=\"en-US\">The Complainant asserts that, in the light of the above,<span>&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><span lang=\"en-US\">the disputed domain names are under the effective control of a single person or organisation.<\/span><br \/>The Panel agrees with the Complainant's arguments and, in line with decisions of other panels in similar cases (see, for example, WIPO Case No. D2023-1121<span>)<\/span>, considers that, o<span>n the balance of probabilities, the disputed domain names are under the control of a single person or organisation.<\/span><\/p>\n<p lang=\"en-US\" align=\"JUSTIFY\"><span>Therefore, the Panel decides to grant the requested consolidation.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>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": [
        "Michele Antonini"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2026-04-04 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p>The Complainant is the registrant, among others, of the EU trademark registration No. 0886389, &ldquo;<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">MIYABI<\/span>\", registered on October 28, 2005, for goods and services in classes 8, 11 and 21.<\/p>\n<div>\n<p><br \/>The disputed domain name &lt;miyabiknives.com&gt; was registered on October 2, 2023. The disputed domain name &lt;miyabi-knives.org&gt; was registered on March 14, 2024.<\/p>\n<\/div>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "miyabi-knives.org": "TRANSFERRED",
        "miyabiknives.com": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}