{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-108708", "time_of_filling": "2026-06-16 09:57:26", "domain_names": [ "nestle.website" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Societe des Produits Nestle" ], "complainant_representative": "Thomsen Trampedach GmbH", "respondent": [ "Yuse Takato" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

A. Complainant's Factual Allegations<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant is an owned subsidiary of Nestlé SA, the main operating company in the Nestlé Group founded by Henri Nestlé in 1866. The Nestlé Group is active in the sale of food products and related services around the globe, with the largest product categories including coffee and beverages. The Group markets its products in 190 countries, has about 275,000 employees worldwide, and has a physical presence in 80 countries. The Group is the largest publicly traded food and nutritional products company in the world and has been since 2014. The Group ranks 106th in Fortune magazine's 2024 Fortune Global 500 list. The NESTLE brand has recently been recognized as the most valuable food brand in the world by independent publications such as Brand Finance.  <\/span><\/p>\n

B. <\/span><\/strong>Respondent's Factual Allegations<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Respondent has defaulted in this UDRP administrative proceeding and has consequently made no factual allegations. The Respondent is Yuse Takato, based at the address of 3-40-10-616 Minamisenju, Arakawa ku Tokyo, Postal Code 116-0003, Japan. The disputed domain name was registered on December 30, 2025 by the Respondent, as confirmed by the Registrar. The disputed domain name resolves to a “service unavailable” page and is being offered for sale.<\/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": "

A. COMPLAINANT <\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Language of Proceedings <\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complaint is written in English. According to the registrar's verification response, the language of the registration agreement for the disputed domain name is Japanese. The Complainant submitted a request for English to be the language of this administrative proceeding on the following grounds: i) the Respondent registered the disputed domain name in English term, which reflects its familiarity with English language; ii) the disputed domain name is being offered for sale on SEDO domains marketplace through English-language; iii) a translation of the Complaint into Japanese will entail significant additional costs for the Complainant; iv) conducting the proceeding in English would cause no unfairness or denial of justice to the Respondent.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant's contentions can be summarized as follows:<\/strong><\/p>\n

I. The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights <\/strong><\/p>\n

The disputed domain name <nestle.website> reproduces the Complainant's trademark in its entirety. The choice of <.website> gTLD by the Respondent accentuates the misleading association with the Complainant's trademark, which increases the likelihood of confusion as to the source, sponsorship or affiliation to the Complainant.<\/p>\n

II. The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name on the grounds: i) it does not have trademark rights in NESTLE; ii) it is not commonly known by NESTLE; iii) it has not received license or consent to use NESTLE trademark; iv) it has not used the disputed domain name for a bona fide offering of goods or services, nor for any legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the disputed domain name; v) it failed to prove its right or a legitimate interest in the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n

III. The Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith <\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant submits that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name in bad faith on the grounds: i) previous UDRP Panel decisions have consistently held that the mere registration of a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to a famous or widely known trademark by an unaffiliated entity can by itself create a presumption of bad faith. The NESTLE trademark is famous worldwide, including in Japan. The Complainant has been present in Japan since 1913, and today Nestlé Japan operates three factories with a strong brand portfolio in coffee, chocolate and nutrition products. Given the worldwide fame of the NESTLE trademark, and its long and continuous presence in Japan, the Respondent cannot plausibly claim ignorance of the Complainant's rights at the time of registration; ii) the domain name currently shows a page displaying the sentence \"Service Unavailable No monetization channels available\" and is offered for sale. The Respondent is \"squatting\" on the disputed domain name for the purpose of selling the disputed domain name to the Complainant; iii) the Respondent has not actively used the domain name since its registration. The mere registration and passive holding of a domain name also constitute bad faith; iv) the disputed domain name incorporating the Complainant's famous NESTLE trademark suggests affiliation with the Complainant and its online presence.<\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it. <\/p>\n

B. RESPONDENT <\/strong><\/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": "

Language of Proceedings<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The language of the registration agreement is Japanese. The Complainant has requested that the language of the proceedings be English. The Respondent did not respond to the issue of the language of the proceedings and did not reject the Complainant’s request. The Panel is given discretion under Paragraph 11 of the Rules to determine the appropriate language of the administrative proceeding. Paragraph 10 of the Rules mentions that the Panel shall ensure that the Parties are treated with equality and that each Party is given a fair opportunity to present its case. <\/span><\/p>\n

Based on the following factors, the Panel has decided that it would be fair and equitable to both parties to have the language of the proceedings be English: <\/span><\/p>\n