According to the information provided by the registrar the disputed domain name <bougyes-infrastucture.com> was registered on 3 March 2026.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name does not resolve to an active webpage. In addition, MX records have been set up.
<\/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<\/strong> According to Complainant, Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name. Complainant contends that Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by Complainant in any way. Complainant contends that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with Respondent. Neither license nor authorization has been granted to Respondent to make any use of Complainant’s trademark BOUYGUES or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by Complainant. Finally, the disputed domain name resolves to a parking page. Complainant contends that Respondent did not make any use of disputed domain name since its registration, and it confirms that Respondent has no demonstrable plan to use the disputed domain name. It demonstrates a lack of legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n According to Complainant the disputed domain name is registered and is being used in bad faith. The Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its well-known and distinctive trademarks and the domain name associated with them. Past panels have confirmed the notoriety of the trademarks BOUYGUES. The combination of the terms “bouygues” and “infrastructure” in the disputed domain name cannot be coincidental as it refers to a subsidiary of Complainant. Thus, Respondent, who is domiciled in France, should have known about Complainant at the time of the registration of the disputed domain name. Furthermore, the disputed domain name resolves to a parking page. Complainant contends that Respondent has not demonstrated any activity in respect of the disputed domain name, and it is not possible to conceive of any plausible actual or contemplated active use of the domain name by Respondent that would not be illegitimate, such as by being a passing off, an infringement of consumer protection legislation, or an infringement of Complainant’s rights under trademark law. As prior WIPO UDRP panels have held, the incorporation of a famous mark into a domain name, coupled with an inactive website, may be evidence of bad faith registration and use. Finally, the disputed domain name has been set up with MX records which suggests that it may be actively used for email purposes. This is also indicative of bad faith registration and use because any email emanating from the disputed domain name could not be used for any good faith purpose.<\/p>\n 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 Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).<\/p>",
"no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": " Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown 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": " 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": [
"Dinant T.L. Oosterbaan"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2026-04-06 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " Complainant is the owner of the international trademark BOUYGUES nr. 390771, registration date 1 September 1972 and of the French trademark BOUYGUES nr. 1197244 registration date 30 July 1982.<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"bouygues-infrastructure.com": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}
Complainant contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it.
According to the evidence submitted by Complainant, Complainant is a diversified group of industrial companies. Its businesses are centered on four sectors of activity: Construction, Energies and services, Media and Telecoms and operating in over 80 countries.
According to Complainant the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark BOUYGUES as the disputed domain name contains the trademark in its entirety. Complainant contends that the addition of the term “infrastructure” is not sufficient to escape the finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademarks. It does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to Complainant’s trademarks. It does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and Complainant and its trademarks.<\/p>\n
Respondent
<\/strong>
No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/p>",
"rights": "